Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What concern do porters have with architecture-all-only-packages?
>
> With most Arch: all packages, little to none. The concern is actually in
> *not* having stuff that is *only* needed for -indep targets (which will
> generally never be built by porting ma
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What concern do porters have with architecture-all-only-packages?
>
> With most Arch: all packages, little to none. The concern is actually in
> *not* having stuff that is *only* needed for -indep targets (which will
> generally never be built by porting ma
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 09:57:10AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
> >> the CVS version of auctex, a
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 09:57:10AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
> >> the CVS version of auctex, a
Hi.
Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>Either I don't understand your sentence, or I have a problem reading the
>policy. In
Or I was wrong. :)
>file:///usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy.html/ch-miscellaneous.html#s-deb
>ianrules
>
>I can find statements about the targets binary-arch and bi
Hi.
Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>Either I don't understand your sentence, or I have a problem reading the
>policy. In
Or I was wrong. :)
>file:///usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy.html/ch-miscellaneous.html#s-deb
>ianrules
>
>I can find statements about the targets binary-arch and bi
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
>> the CVS version of auctex, a LaTeX mode for Emacs. Since it's only an
>> Emacs-addon written in Lisp, it'
Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank Küster wrote:
>> In the original package's control file, there is a line of
>> Build-Depends-Indep, but no Build-Depends. Does this make sense for a
>> source package that has no architecture dependent binary packages at
>> all? Why not just use
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
>> the CVS version of auctex, a LaTeX mode for Emacs. Since it's only an
>> Emacs-addon written in Lisp, it'
Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank Küster wrote:
>> In the original package's control file, there is a line of
>> Build-Depends-Indep, but no Build-Depends. Does this make sense for a
>> source package that has no architecture dependent binary packages at
>> all? Why not just use
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Hi,
>
> for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
> the CVS version of auctex, a LaTeX mode for Emacs. Since it's only an
> Emacs-addon written in Lisp, it's of course architecture independent.
>
> In d
Frank Küster wrote:
> In the original package's control file, there is a line of
> Build-Depends-Indep, but no Build-Depends. Does this make sense for a
> source package that has no architecture dependent binary packages at
> all? Why not just use Build-Depends here and use Build-Depends-Indep
> on
Hi,
for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
the CVS version of auctex, a LaTeX mode for Emacs. Since it's only an
Emacs-addon written in Lisp, it's of course architecture independent.
In debian/rules of the "real" package from unstable, binary requires
binary-arch
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Hi,
>
> for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
> the CVS version of auctex, a LaTeX mode for Emacs. Since it's only an
> Emacs-addon written in Lisp, it's of course architecture independent.
>
> In d
Frank Küster wrote:
> In the original package's control file, there is a line of
> Build-Depends-Indep, but no Build-Depends. Does this make sense for a
> source package that has no architecture dependent binary packages at
> all? Why not just use Build-Depends here and use Build-Depends-Indep
> on
Hi,
for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
the CVS version of auctex, a LaTeX mode for Emacs. Since it's only an
Emacs-addon written in Lisp, it's of course architecture independent.
In debian/rules of the "real" package from unstable, binary requires
binary-arch
16 matches
Mail list logo
