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 debian-dpkg@l.d.o?

I think you hit the following issue:

  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

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

                        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  `-

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reproducible-builds mailing list

Reply via email to