Hi Dmitry, On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 07:17:07PM +0300, Dmitry Shachnev wrote: > So are you also interested in me making Sphinx architecture:any?
I'm still kinda split about this. I discussed this with Guillem Jover and Ian Jackson at length to avoid that step and still don't like it. > Do you have any use cases where the documentation should be built in > build-arch target, rather than build-indep (which is only run for arch-indep > builds)? Unfortunately, yes. python-sphinx has ~700 build-rdeps. We can simply under approximate those that need python-sphinx during build-arch by ignoring all packages that build architecture independent packages. That leaves at least 25 affected packages: axe-demultiplexer buildbot cvxopt lava-dispatcher liblognorm mayavi2 minieigen mydumper pathspider portabase py-postgresql pyalsaaudio pynifti python-brainstorm python-chaco python-enable python-prctl python-srp python-traits salmon squirrel3 trafficserver tsung urwid vmdebootstrap Of these, liblognorm is a high popcon package that specifically fails cross building, because its python-sphinx dependency is cross unsatisfiable. If we can avoid turning python-sphinx Arch:any, then I'm all for it. So which route shall we pursue now? I basically see three: * Split documentation packages out of the above. * Turn python-sphinx arch:any and annotate python-sphinx dependencies with :native. * Change dependency resolution in general. Update dpkg, apt, dose3. For instance allowing :native annotations on Arch:all packages would suffice. Indeed, I do like moving documentation to Arch:all packages, but I'm not sure we want even more small binary packages. Helmut