On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 03:54:41PM +0000, Chris Lamb wrote: > > The tag I am requesting here mostly targets packages that lack any > > Multi-Arch header (i.e. not covered by the above tag). > > Thank you for the clarification. :) I have just pushed the following: > > > https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/commit/?id=8705ed43bd19cb40ada45897333ca56fcd187738
Thank you. I'm slightly uneasy about the updated advice still. + An alternative approach is to use pkg-config(1) or to specify + <tt>Multi-Arch: foreign</tt>. This might be read as if adding Multi-Arch: foreign would always be an option. However, adding such a marking on development packages is rarely correct. There are basically two classes where this is correct: 1. Header-only library with a tool. (I don't know any examples) 2. Splitting development tools and development headers into different packages. Usually, you have a libfoo-dev and a libfoo-dev-bin package both in section libdevel. The libfoo-dev is M-A:same and depends on libfoo-dev-bin, which is M-A:foreign. apt-cache search dev-bin yields good examples. Still few of them. Given that wrong markings with M-A:foreign are a serious problem to cross building with wide consequences and they cannot be easily identified, I am uneasy with that advise and suggest updating it to: + An alternative approach is to use pkg-config(1) or potentially + splitting architecture-independent development tools to a separate + package that can be marked <tt>Multi-Arch: foreign</tt>. Alternatively, remove the M-A:foreign alternative from the description. Helmut