On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 09:17:25AM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 01:11:11PM +0530, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > As an aside, I was wondering whether a Lintian check for this would be sane,
> > like an inverse of "arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object"?
>
> I think
On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 01:11:11PM +0530, Chris Lamb wrote:
> As an aside, I was wondering whether a Lintian check for this would be sane,
> like an inverse of "arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object"?
I think not.
There are several packages in the archive that totally ought to be
Daniel Baumann wrote:
> I was wondering why it's arch:any instead of arch:all.
Indeed, I guess I should not have accepted this from NEW as-is. Sorry about
that.
As an aside, I was wondering whether a Lintian check for this would be sane,
like an inverse of
Package: spectre-meltdown-checker
Version: 0.27-1
Hi,
thanks for packaging spectre-meltdown-checker. Since this is a
shell-script "only" package, I was wondering why it's arch:any instead
of arch:all.
Regards,
Daniel
4 matches
Mail list logo
