On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Joachim Breitner <nome...@debian.org> wrote
> So yes, I'm very confident that haddock's interface files are not arch > independent. Which is quite bad, I guess. > > I see two solutions: > * We patch haddock to not store any arch dependent data. > (Probably quite some work) > * We mach all -doc packages arch any instead of all. > (Easiler but less elegant) > * We put the haddock interface files in the -dev packages. > (Not sure about the implications) > > They are most certainly architecture dependent, and must be set to architecture any. All the packages in our repository have this change, and the cabal-debian tool generates a debianization with that architecture. Putting them in the dev package seems a bit unfortunate. What I am not sure about is whether they are compiler dependent -- if they are I guess the package name should be libghc6-foo-doc rather than haskell-foo-doc.
