Bug#51832: packaging-manual: Architecture setting: more information.
On Fri, Dec 03, 1999 at 03:41:03PM -0300, Ivan Baldo wrote:
> > Say "Architecture: any" if it contains compiled binaries and
> > "Architecture: all" if it doesn't. You'll soon get bug reports if it
> > fails on another architecture, and you'll need to fix that.
> And how I will do to fix that bugs??? Should I buy a Sun Ultrasparc or
> what? Notice that the packages cannot be fully tested over a network...
Debian developers have access to various machines of different
architectures in the .debian.org domain; see the development pages on
www.debian.org for details.
> Ok, Roman told me that the porters have something like an override
> file, so, if a package doesn't work for a given architecture, then they
> put it in that override file, fill a bug report and don't build it for
> that architecture.
> So it is OK and I have already decided (also before sending this
> wishlist bug report) to put architecture "any" in both packages.
That's what you should do, yes.
> I hope that people test the packages in the other architectures and
> start reporting bugs... but I will leave the bugs open with priority
> normal unless someone else correct that bugs.
No, you have to attempt to correct the bugs if you are able; you are
the maintainer.
> Anyway, the purpose of this wishlist bugreport, is because I didn't
> know that I should set the architecture to "any" noneless the packages
> weren't tested on other architectures. So, I still think that this has
> to be clarified in the packaging manual or policy.
Agreed.
BTW, please realise that it is fairly rare in most straightforward
packages for there to be architecture related bugs. They tend to be
one of a small variety of reasons; the three I have experienced or
could imagine are:
(1) The package contains assembler files. In which case, you've no
chance unless the particular architecture is supported.
(2) Compiler bug; outside of your jurisdiction, but you can file a bug
or require the package to be built with a certain compiler version.
(3) Architecture or OS specific package, such as a set of tools for
x86 hardware or a Hurd-specific package. Then there's no point
building for other architectures.
I've only come across (2) in my personal experience.
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://www.debian.org/~jdg
Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/
Reply to: