On 14 Nov 2018, at 23:15, Jeremy Bicha <jbi...@debian.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 5:22 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > <glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: >> >> Hi Jeremy! >> >> On 11/14/18 10:52 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote: >>> As requested, this is librsvg reintroduced for ports that don't >>> supported the rustified librsvg yet. The name is because this is >>> librsvg written in the C programming language (instead of in Rust). >> >> Thanks a lot for your effort and the initiative, I really appreciate >> the idea. I also apologize for my harsh wording in the heated the >> discussion we had. I'm very glad that this - as it is always the case >> in Debian - is leading to a productive solution. Great! >> >>> Currently, the packaging builds the same binary package names as >>> src:librsvg. There was a suggestion to use different binary names with >>> versioned Provides (against the existing librsvg binary package >>> names). I'm not sure that provides much benefit but we can discuss >>> that. >>> >>> I don't have the ability to do the initial upload for this package >>> since I don't have easy access to do the binary build required for >>> ftp-master NEW. >>> >>> I don't have experience with archive management for non-release >>> architectures at all. >> >> The problem that we have is that it's not possible to upload a package >> to Debian which does not build any binaries on the release architectures, >> the archive would be removed from the archive immediately. >> >> I assume what we could do is maybe have a package that is built from >> multiple sources so that it builds different binary packages for the >> Rust and non-Rust targets. >> >> I have CC'ed James Clarke and Adrian Bunk who might be interested in >> this discussion as well and probably can maybe help in the process. >> >> Again, thanks a lot for the efforts and sorry for my heated and >> unprofessional behavior. >> >> Thanks a lot! >> Adrian >> >> -- >> .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz >> : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org >> `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de >> `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913 > > Would an arch:all librsvg-c-doc package be sufficient for the "must > build a binary package on a release architecture" requirement?
People might frown on it, but other source packages (ab)use this, and it certainly works from a technical standpoint. I would hope there are no objections to this approach. However, kfreebsd-* and hurd-i386 are on ftp-master and don't (yet) have rust, so those will also keep the source package around. James