Le 05/01/2015 15:59, Mike Gabriel a écrit : > HI Raphaël, > > On Di 30 Dez 2014 00:21:34 CET, Raphaël Halimi wrote: > >> Package: mate-terminal >> Version: 1.8.1+dfsg1-3 >> Severity: minor >> >> Hi, >> >> Please consider adding "Multi-Arch: foreign" to debian/control, as its >> absence prevents apt to consider mate-terminal a valid dependency for a >> package built for some other architecture. >> >> For example, mate-terminal provides x-terminal-emulator, but on an amd64 >> machine, steam, which is an i386-only package depending on "xterm | >> x-terminal-emulator", pulls xterm along with its dependencies, even if >> mate-terminal is already installed. >> >> Regards, > > aren't packages not marked as "Multi-Arch: <something>" automatically > considered as "Multi-Arch: foreign"??? I normally don't put a > Multi-Arch line into debian/control if a package is to be considered > as foregin. (This may actually be based on half-knowledge, so you may > actually be right and we should change debian/control accordingly). > > Otherwise: Maybe this rather is an APT issue? > > If possible, please point me to the correct section in Debian policy > and I will add that in debian/control of mate-terminal. > > Mike >
I didn't find anything in the policy about Multi-Arch but [1] says (if I understand correctly) that without the field present, it's considered as "Multi-Arch: no" (exactly, it says "Multi-Arch: no" is "the pre-multiarch behavior"). I reported the bug after initially asking in debian-user [2] (there is some... noise at the beginning of the thread, look for Sven Joachim's answer for the useful part). [1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MultiarchSpec#Binary_package_control_fields [2] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.user/490152 Regards, -- Raphaël Halimi
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
