Hi Guillem,
Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-03-08 at 08:27:32 +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> > There was a time where gnudatalanguage didn't build on exactly one
> > architecture (arm64): See https://bugs.debian.org/803552 and
> > https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-astro/packages/gnudatalang
On Tue, 2016-03-08 at 08:27:32 +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Guillem Jover wrote:
> > Can you present a case where using a negative specification would be
> > more correct than a positive one?
>
> "More correct" maybe not (not sure what "more correct" means as
> "correct" is boolean for me), but su
Hi Guillem,
Guillem Jover wrote:
> This was filed some time ago.
Hrm, seem to have missed that one.
> Can you present a case where using a negative specification would be
> more correct than a positive one?
"More correct" maybe not (not sure what "more correct" means as
"correct" is boolean for
Control: merge 797347 -1
On Sun, 2015-12-06 at 21:49:52 +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Package: dpkg
> Version: 1.18.3
> Severity: wishlist
> it's rather tedious to find the correct "Architecture:" value for a
> binary package -- and also to keep it uptodate with the growing list of
> architecture
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.18.3
Severity: wishlist
Dear Guillem,
it's rather tedious to find the correct "Architecture:" value for a
binary package -- and also to keep it uptodate with the growing list of
architecture -- if only one or two architectures need to be excluded.
It would be very conven
5 matches
Mail list logo
