On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 11:51:50AM +0100, Ralf Treinen wrote: > On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 05:57:33AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > Quoting Colin Watson (2016-11-12 03:58:04) > > > On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 12:58:13AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > > > > * wanna-build(?)'s resolution of arch-specific build-depends is buggy. > > > > For > > > > example, my package arch-test wants, among others: > > > > binutils-x86-64-linux-gnu [!amd65 !i386 !x32j] which is a no-op on > > > > amd64, > ^^^^^ > > I assume that was just a typo in the mail.
Eh? Both my original mail and Johannes' quote you replied to contain: > > binutils-x86-64-linux-gnu [!amd64 !i386 !x32] which is a no-op on amd64, It's puzzling where 4->5 and insertion of j could came from, but both my mailbox and the lists archive on lists.d.o get it correct, implying it's a problem on your side. I can understand a bit flip, but insertion is harder to explain. -- A true bird-watcher waves his tail while doing so.
