Hi!
On Sun, 2022-04-03 at 19:00:33 +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:26 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > In principle shared libraries should never be marked Essential:yes nor
> > Protected:yes, I think this was a special case, that will go away once
> > the shared library
Hi Guillem,
On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:26 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-04-01 at 14:41:51 +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> > Package: dpkg
> > Version: 1.20.9
> > Severity: normal
>
> > Protection is applied to foreign-arch packages (e.g. libgcc-s1:i386 on
> > amd64) even though they
Hi!
On Fri, 2022-04-01 at 14:41:51 +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> Package: dpkg
> Version: 1.20.9
> Severity: normal
> Protection is applied to foreign-arch packages (e.g. libgcc-s1:i386 on
> amd64) even though they aren't relevant to the scenarios that
> protection is designed to prevent (as I
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.20.9
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
Protection is applied to foreign-arch packages (e.g. libgcc-s1:i386 on
amd64) even though they aren't relevant to the scenarios that
protection is designed to prevent (as I understand it):
> Protected packages contain mostly
4 matches
Mail list logo