Johannes Schauer wrote:
> [the need for Javascript] should be reported as a bug against the tracker.

Submitted as
and subscribed to it.

i wrote:
> >  Doesn't "Architecture: all" imply "Multi-arch: foreign" ?

> No. Multi-arch:foreign means that a package of architecture foo is able to
> satisfy the dependencies of a package with architecture bar.
> [...]
> imagine an Architecture:all package doing this:
>   #!/bin/sh
>   gcc "$@"
> Certainly, what this architecture independent shell script does is
> architecture dependent and thus the package containing it cannot be
> marked as Multi-Arch:foreign.

How can this script be "Architecture:all" if it does not work as expected
on some architectures ?
  "all, which indicates an architecture-independent package."

So is there a difference between "being architecture independent" and
"acting architecture independent" ?
(Hopefully i will never have to decide which of both is in effect.)

Have a nice day :)


Reply via email to