Steve Langasek <[email protected]> writes: > Any chance you can elaborate on what didn't work well? I believe this > will work robustly for packages whose debian/rules is a policy-compliant > makefile, and I think that the handful of packages which don't could > reasonably required to, at minimum, return a compatible error code when > asked about build-arch. I would expect that NMUing that set of packages > would take far less effort and archive churn than either setting a flag > day, or annotating debian/control with Build-Options.
I went back and searched, and I may have misremembered this. The problem that we ran into with Lintian I think was that we were worried running make -qn could invoke code inside the package, due to make functions and similar cases, which was a security risk for Lintian. Obviously the same thing doesn't apply to the buildds. It obviously won't work for the leave package, but IIRC that was a test case anyway and will just have to change. So this may actually be fine. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
