On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 06:15:35AM +0000, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 2011-02-15, Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> wrote: > >> sbuild switched to using Dpkg::Deps for parsing dependencies; we would > >> ideally want an equivalent to Dpkg::Deps::reduce_arch() to do the > >> stripping (if reduce_arch wasn't the appropriate place to do it > >> already). This saves us from reimplementing yet another parser, and > >> it getting outdated; we currently use it for stripping dependencies > >> not needed for the build's architecture. > > Does this need to be backported to the squeeze dpkg to be usable on the > > buildds? I assume it will. (I'm making my list of features we're going to > > want backported in apt/dpkg for buildds in relation to this, since we missed > > the boat by a bit for squeeze.)
> Uh. As that'd involve the host dpkg, it likely should go into squeeze proper, > which is at the SRM's discretion. I'm pretty sure that DSA won't like the > idea > of using dpkg from -backports. Same for apt. I wasn't suggesting the use of -backports here, I was referring to backported features in the general sense of the term. Of course I'm not taking it for granted that you would accept these packages into squeeze and intended to ask you if this would be ok, once there were actual patches to be considered. But since you're here: would targeted patches to backport support for :any/:native be ok for a stable update? :-) Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
