No. The dpkg-architecture terminology may confuse you. Here's from
Packaging Manual 3.0.1.0 section 3.2.1 (debian/rules - the main
building script): ... BUILD for specification of the build machine
or HOST for specification of the machine we build for.
Hmm... it guess I was confused by the
On 10 Aug 1999, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
Santiago == Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Santiago If we followed this rule of only object in extreme circumstances,
Santiago we could be drawing circles forever. See:
On the contrary, if every one objected formally all the
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 42907 debian-policy
Bug#42907: *wav* executable are not setgid audio.
Bug reassigned from package `wavtools' to `debian-policy'.
retitle 42907 Policy should mention permissions of /dev/[dsp,audio,mixer]
Bug#42907: *wav* executable are not
On Tue, Aug 10, 1999 at 02:01:08PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Anthony Towns wrote:
[...] formal objections are only appropriate in extreme circumstances.
1. Someone propose to abandon /usr/share/doc in potato and go back to
/usr/doc. Two advocates of using /usr/doc in
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
severity 42907 normal
Bug#42907: Policy should mention permissions of /dev/[dsp,audio,mixer]
Severity set to `normal'.
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Ian Jackson
(administrator, Debian bugs database)
Gordon Matzigkeit wrote:
Do you have any tangible examples of an architecture-specific example
file? Maybe I haven't been following this thread closely enough,
because I've only seen discussion of ``what-if'' scenarios.
So far all I'm aware of are some executables that shouldn't be in
Jim Lynch wrote:
From the description arch dep goes in /usr/lib/pkg/examples
emphasize with symlink to /usr/doc/pkg/examples /emphasize,
I cannot visualize the tree. For one, how would one distinguish
arch-indep stuff from the arch-specific?
Whatever works. I made that posposfully vaguse so
7 matches
Mail list logo
