On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 09:57:55AM +0100, Jérémy Bobbio wrote: > Santiago Vila: > > If we had a case like this, an architecture field in the source > > package saying "i386 all" would mean that we could do all this: > > > > "dpkg-buildpackage" under i386 to build the i386.deb and the all.deb. > > "dpkg-buildpackage -A" under i386 to build only the all.deb. > > "dpkg-buildpackage -B" under i386 to build only the i386.deb. > > > > and at the same time it would be possible that the source package is > > just not designed or ready to build the all.deb under, say, amd64. > > While I agree, I really think you've identified a hole in the policy > here. Either we need a formal agreement that "i386 all" = "Arch: all" > packages must be built on i386 or an extra field somewhere to indicate > that. > > I would suggest moving the discussion to a better suited communication > channel as this is a general issue. Maybe email@example.com?
I think you hit the following issue: ftbfs_build_depends_not_available_on_amd64: description: | Package build depends on some package(s), which are not available on amd64. Relevant URLs: - https://wiki.debian.org/Build-Depends-Indep - https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/217427 If I understand this particular issue, I think it's the same highlighted and solved in ubuntu in that bug, with the addition of Build-Indep-Architecture. Please correct me if I'm wrong. -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. more about me: http://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproduciblefirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds