Andreas, you didn't do anything wrong, reason:
On 16.09.19 19:38, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 05:38:47PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> Determining dependency 'gtest_main' with pkg-config executable
>> '/usr/bin/pkg-config'
>> PKG_CONFIG_PATH:
>> Called `/usr/bin/pkg-con
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 05:38:47PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Determining dependency 'gtest_main' with pkg-config executable
> '/usr/bin/pkg-config'
> PKG_CONFIG_PATH:
> Called `/usr/bin/pkg-config --modversion gtest_main` -> 1
There is no pkgconfig file for gtest_main in the archive.
--
WBR,
Control: tags -1 pending
Hi,
I wanted to upgrade to the latest upstream version in Git[1] where
upstream has changed the build system. Its a bit irritating to use
meson on top of cmake (at least I have never seen this before) and I
think I have added all needed Build-Depends (locally - not commi
their support library which are already in separate binary
>> packages.
>> Therefore I just want to not build the OpenGL-related binary packages on
>> armel
>> and armhf.
>>
>> But how can I do that? Putting "Architecture: any [!armel !armhf]" in
>&
want to not build the
OpenGL-related binary packages on armel and armhf.
But how can I do that? Putting "Architecture: any [!armel !armhf]" in
debian/control is not supported:
dpkg-source: error: architecture any only allowed on its own (list for
package libcgal-qt5-11 is 'any&
binary packages on armel
and armhf.
But how can I do that? Putting "Architecture: any [!armel !armhf]" in
debian/control is not supported:
dpkg-source: error: architecture any only allowed on its own (list for package
libcgal-qt5-11 is 'any')
Do I really need to expand the archit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Take a look at dh_make, in the dh-make package, and debhelper, in the package
>> of the same name.
>
>That helped. Thanks. Now I'm working on the control file. I notice
>that jserv's control file sets the architecture to "an
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Now I'm working on the control file. I notice
> that jserv's control file sets the architecture to "any", even though
> the deb-control man page only mentions architecture "all". Which should
> I use?
Use "any" if you are uploading an arch-spe
he architecture to "any", even though
> the deb-control man page only mentions architecture "all". Which should
> I use?
The difference is:
architecture "any": The package will be compiled on each architecture.
(e.g. a C program)
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Take a look at dh_make, in the dh-make package, and debhelper, in the package
> of the same name.
That helped. Thanks. Now I'm working on the control file. I notice
that jserv's control file sets the architecture to "any", even though
the deb-contro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Take a look at dh_make, in the dh-make package, and debhelper, in the package
>> of the same name.
>
>That helped. Thanks. Now I'm working on the control file. I notice
>that jserv's control file sets the architecture to "a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Now I'm working on the control file. I notice
> that jserv's control file sets the architecture to "any", even though
> the deb-control man page only mentions architecture "all". Which should
> I use?
Use "any" if you are uploading an arch-sp
ure to "any", even though
> the deb-control man page only mentions architecture "all". Which should
> I use?
The difference is:
architecture "any": The package will be compiled on each architecture.
(e.g. a C program)
archi
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Take a look at dh_make, in the dh-make package, and debhelper, in the package
> of the same name.
That helped. Thanks. Now I'm working on the control file. I notice
that jserv's control file sets the architecture to "any", even though
the deb-contr
14 matches
Mail list logo
