On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 09:25:04AM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > I don't understand why it considers ppc64el to be important. 2.1.0-2 does not > have a build for ppc64el, and ppc64el is not in the architecture list of the > source package. (There is a ppc64el build in stable, for 2.0.1-3.) Do I need > some sort of manual nudging here?
Nevermind, it seems it was still stuck in the architecture list of one of the subpackages further down! /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: https://www.sesse.net/
