Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote: > Hi Steve, > > On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 13:30 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 09:26:59PM +0100, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote: >> That's not how hinting works. > Thought so, but couldn't get porters to remove the false dependency. > >> But that seems unlikely to happen, since you've removed s390 and sparc from >> the architecture list for this package for reasons completely unrelated to >> portability. If you need help getting action taken regarding a wrong >> dep-wait on a buildd, please ask debian-release -- but don't just decide to >> stop supporting an architecture. > OK, please remove false liblame-dev dependency from m68k (sparc seems > to be removed > meanwhile).
bogus dep-wait removed on m68k >> s390 may be a different matter since the package has been marked >> "Not-for-us" (grumble) by the buildd maintainer; but the binary still has to >> be removed from unstable to let the package propagate naturally into >> testing. > So vice can be arch: all, even if s390 says not-for-us, right? Yes. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
