Hi, On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Guillem Jover wrote: > This was actually intended, but as it's a functionality change it should > have been in a separate commit, or at least explicitly documented in the > commit message. :/ The reasoning is (as hinted on the last paragraph of > the 58e7276b commit message) that packages w/o an Architecture field > should still be supported, but that does not imply we have to accept > them by default. So in that sense --force-architecture implies it's > still supported, but not blessed as a conforming package at this point > in time, as this should really only happen with either ancient packages, > or current bogusly built ones. > > So if you don't mind I'll be reverting 13637ddf and document this > properly.
Ok, please update the test-suite as well to match. I should have waited until I knew your original intent but as it was interfering with the rebased branch pu/multiarch/master that I wanted to work on I tried to make the right guess. No luck. :-( Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English) ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
