Quoting Colin Watson (2013-10-04 19:05:20) > On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 06:47:13PM +0200, Jérémy Lal wrote: > > The actual problem of these two packages is that they have > > Architecture: any whereas they are in fact platform-independent. > > They should be Architecture: all > > As discussed on IRC, while I agree that this would be an improvement > (in that it would hide the problem from dependency analysis tools, > which typically have to ignore missing dependencies of Architecture: > all packages on non-i386 in order to be at all practical to run), I > think it ignores the issue that we should not be presenting > uninstallable packages to users. > > Architecture: all packages that contain scripts (as opposed to large > data packages) are typically small enough that the small amount of > duplication in the archive resulting from making them > architecture-dependent is of very little consequence, especially when > the effect is presenting a cleaner archive to users invoking their > package manager on less-common architectures.
Packages that contains scripts should depend on the interpreter for those scripts - as node-xmlhttprequest correctly does. I don't see how it can clutter package managers for our users (except on unstable which arguably are developers/testers, regular users): AIUI packages only enter testing when their binary dependencies can be satisfied. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private