I think there's some confusion. I'm only asking to mark it [linux-any]
so that ubuntuBSD can install the package. This change has no effect on
Linux!
-Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}, ${python3:Depends},
libapparmor-perl, lsb-base, debconf, initramfs-tools | linux-initramfs-tool
> Well then could you apply the patch to make apparmor installable?
The dependency on any kind of initramfs-tools has been dropped in Debian
a while ago (2.9.0-3+exp1), because AFAIK it was needed only for the
early modules loading code, that was removed a while ago. For some
undocumented reason,
Well then could you apply the patch to make apparmor installable? If
it's built on bsd architectures, then other packages use it in Build-
Depends. It helps if it's installable then :-)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
> I'm confused then. Why is the Architecture field in debian/control set
to any?
> And why debian/patches/non-linux.patch, debian/non-
linux/apparmor_parser?
I find it marginally useful to build on Debian/kFreeBSD: this can
sometimes help discover real bugs that affect Linux but would not be
Hi Seth
I'm confused then. Why is the Architecture field in debian/control set
to any?
And why debian/patches/non-linux.patch, debian/non-
linux/apparmor_parser?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Can you describe what problems this patch solves?
AppArmor currently requires a Linux kernel; while there's been
speculation that it would be possible to port the AppArmor framework to
a BSD or Illumos kernel no one has actually done the work yet.
Thanks
--
You received this bug notification
The attachment "apparmor.diff" seems to be a patch. If it isn't, please
remove the "patch" flag from the attachment, remove the "patch" tag, and
if you are a member of the ~ubuntu-reviewers, unsubscribe the team.
[This is an automated message performed by a Launchpad user owned by
~brian-murray,
