"Steven G. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 2. Don't set architecture to a value other than ``all'' or ``any'' > unless the upstream package is intrinsically unportable > (e.g. a program to disable a Pentium CPU ID). If the package > is theoretically portable, even if it currently fails to build on > some architectures, it should be set to architecture any/all to > open a path for future porters. Setting your architecture to > ``i386'' is usually incorrect.
In your case, you *were* able to build the package for powerpc, and it seems to work, so in this case I would agree that the package should make the changes you suggest and add PowerPC to the list (possibly just going all the way and making it 'any'). But I do think this goes too far. There might be good reasons why the upstream maintainers or debian maintainers are unable to maintain a ported package -- notably, if the upstream were not willing to take patches for building in other architectures. OTOH -- I do agree in principle. If you reword this slightly and file as a wishlist on developers-reference I think I can add what you want.... -- ...Adam Di Carlo..<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...<URL:http://www.onshored.com/>
