block 687900 by 621050
block 687900 by 684672
block 687900 by 650974
block 687900 by 636383
thanks
Hi,
filing these as blockers for #687900 so that there is one place to track all
the bits to be documented.
cheers,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message
Also note that currently what little multiarch documentation seems to
be out of date. In particular it says:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MultiarchSpec#Extended_semantics_of_per-architecture_package_relationships
| This introduces a new dependency syntax using the colon (:) character,
| which is di
Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'd rather not do this piecemeal
Fair enough. Thanks for filing the bug, by the way.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://list
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> To be precise, am I correct in assuming this means documenting the
> following?
> * the Multi-Arch field (meaning of values "same", "foreign",
>"allowed")
> * how the Architecture field affects dependencies
> * installation, configuration, upgrade, and removal pr
Russ Allbery wrote:
> There are various bugs already filed about some edge cases and
> specific issues with multiarch, but none to track the general
> documentation of multiarch handling in Policy. This bug will be
> used to discuss the overall wording.
To be precise, am I correct in assuming th
Package: debian-policy
Severity: normal
There are various bugs already filed about some edge cases and
specific issues with multiarch, but none to track the general
documentation of multiarch handling in Policy. This bug will be
used to discuss the overall wording. It's possible some of the
exis
6 matches
Mail list logo
