On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Neil Williams wrote: > Do we care about any distinction between optional and extra any longer?
I would say no we don't and suggest these steps: Remove it from policy: https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-priorities Get dak to override all extra packages to optional. Drop extra handling from debcheck. > There's also the issue of debcheck handling of Arch:all packages which > depend on architecture-dependent packages with a limited set of > architectures. It isn't helpful for the PTS to have "issues" reported > about an Arch:all package on non-linux ports depending on a package > which is only available on linux:any. It seems that debcheck is taking > a very simplistic view of that and should really only report if an > architecture-dependent package depends on a package which is not > available on the same arch. I think this illustrates a couple of minor deficiencies wrt Debian and arch-independent packages. There isn't any way to have depends that should be only for certain arches. There isn't any way to restrict which arches list arch-independent packages in their package lists. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caktje6e4v2tm5xsyseo69-rdwvxkahbbwuplp0_1zourbr1...@mail.gmail.com
