Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This particular kind of FHS violation (arch-indep code in arch-dep > directory) is not generally RC, because there are no significant functional > problems as a result of mis-identifying files as arch-dependent that aren't.
Then please clarify this in the etch release policy. Of course I had this thought myself and checked with the release policy text. It explicitly states that any FHS violation is RC, and this one is clearly a violation. It would be nice if the text could be rephrased so that it's clear what actually is RC. Regards, Frank -- Dr. Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
