I finally found some time to write new proposed wording for the section in
Policy on handling architecture-restricted dependencies. Could you review
this change and be sure that I'm correctly describing the situation? I
added a new, fairly complicated example based on one of the ones that
Guillem explained for me.
--- a/policy.sgml
+++ b/policy.sgml
@@ -4188,6 +4188,22 @@ Build-Depends-Indep: texinfo
Build-Depends: kernel-headers-2.2.10 [!hurd-i386],
hurd-dev [hurd-i386], gnumach-dev [hurd-i386]
</example>
+ requires <tt>kernel-headers-2.2.0</tt> on all architectures
+ other than hurd-i386 and requires <tt>hurd-dev</tt> and
+ <tt>gnumach-dev</tt> only on hurd-i386.
+ </p>
+
+ <p>
+ If the architecture-restricted dependency is part of a set of
+ alternatives using <tt>|</tt>, that branch of the alternative is
+ ignored completely on architectures that do not match the
+ restriction. For example:
+ <example compact="compact">
+Build-Depends: foo [!i386] | bar [!amd64]
+ </example>
+ is equivalent to <tt>bar</tt> on the i386 architecture, to
+ <tt>foo</tt> on the amd64 architecture, and to <tt>foo |
+ bar</tt> on all other architectures.
</p>
<p>
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
