On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 02:00:58PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > Please move the shared library into a separate package. > > That seems excessive to move one file into its own package. Probably > > tagging it different would be better.
> Right. I would suggest tagging procps Multi-Arch: allowed instead of > Multi-Arch: foreign then, per > <https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MultiarchSpec#Extended_semantics_of_per-architecture_package_relationships>. > Normally I would insist that a shared library should be split out into a > separate package so that folks doing cross-compiling can install a > foreign-arch libproc-dev without having to remove procps from their > environment, but in this case I think it's probably not worthwhile, because > there seem to be only three packages anywhere that build-depend on > libproc-dev. Multi-Arch: allowed should be sufficient for the foreseeable > future. I should also note here that for the moment, the Debian archive does not support packages declaring the necessary dependency on procps:any that's required in order for us to get any use out of Multi-Arch: allowed. But it's intended to support such annotated dependencies sometime in the near future (i.e., before it actually becomes a blocker). -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
