Daniel Baumann wrote: > I was wondering why it's arch:any instead of arch:all.
Indeed, I guess I should not have accepted this from NEW as-is. Sorry about
that.
As an aside, I was wondering whether a Lintian check for this would be sane,
like an inverse of "arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object"?
Best wishes,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
`-
