On Sat, 04 Sep 2010, Russ Allbery wrote: > Raphael Hertzog <hert...@debian.org> writes: > > On Thu, 02 Sep 2010, Russ Allbery wrote: > > >> I believe this is true of all binary relationship fields and all build > >> relationship fields as well. The dpkg-dev tools unfold all of those > >> fields when generating *.dsc, *.changes, and DEBIAN/control files, and > >> parers of those generated files do not have to cope with folded fields > >> (and I believe are known *not* to be able to cope with folded fields in > >> some cases). We should say that explicitly. > > > Just a minor remark: we modified policy not so long ago to allow the > > Binary field to be folded even in .dsc and .changes. > > > So your assertion is not always true. > > I don't see any contradiction between what you said and what I said, so > I'm not sure what assertion you're disagreeing with. The Binary field is > not a binary or build relationship field.
Right, I've read your sentence too quickly, sorry. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer ◈ [Flattr=20693] Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English) ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
