On Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 09:07:20PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Filip Van Raemdonck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
>
> > > There are a couple of other oddball cases, like
> > >
> > > svgalibg1-dev | svgalib-dummyg1
> > >
> > > where svgalib isn't relevant for all architecture
Filip Van Raemdonck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> > There are a couple of other oddball cases, like
> >
> > svgalibg1-dev | svgalib-dummyg1
> >
> > where svgalib isn't relevant for all architectures.
>
> This is exactly one of the situations where the problem I described a
Hello,
On Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 11:16:50AM -0600, Bdale Garbee wrote:
>
> However, the sbuild tool that
> most Debian autobuilders are using will only try the first alternative without
> manual intervention. The tool probably can and should be augmented to handle
> the full Build-Depends syntax,
On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 01:44:37PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> > It is possible in the Build-Depends specification of a package to give
> > alternatives using syntax like:
> > libltdl0-dev | libltdl3-dev
> I am starting to believe tha
Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> It is possible in the Build-Depends specification of a package to give
> alternatives using syntax like:
>
> libltdl0-dev | libltdl3-dev
I am starting to believe that an "|" in builld depends is evil.
When something is really required
Fellow Debian folk.
Those of us who run autobuilders have started seeing more cases of a new
class of problem showing up in our buildd email that we'd like your help
resolving.
It is possible in the Build-Depends specification of a package to give
alternatives using syntax like:
libltdl
6 matches
Mail list logo
