Re: Debian-Med policy proposal: 64-bit & little-endian only* for new packages
"Michael R. Crusoe" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.debian.devel.medical |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 02/04/2024 07.54, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi, > > Am Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 09:12:49PM +0200 schrieb Sascha Steinbiss: >>> New packages that aren't "Architecture: all": 1. Add >>> "architecture-is-64-bit" and "architecture-is-little-endian" to the >>> "Build-Depends" list in "debian/control". >> >> Nice, didn't know about these virtual packages before. Makes sense for >> new packages -- would this result in an equivalent effect as restricting >> the "Architecture" list in all binary packages? > > If we agree about the policy to restrict new packages to the said > architectures I'd recommend adding this to our package template[1]. Draft MR is at https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/community/package_template/-/merge_requests/2 ; to be merged after the policy is accepted ; comments appreciated there
OpenPGP_signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 840 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- wsF5BAABCAAjFiEEck1gkzcRPHEFUNdHPCZ2P2xn5uIFAmYRRFsFAwAAAAAACgkQPCZ2P2xn5uJ3 3w/9HsGagm/icU4gqOh6GDYysGyl4VIF4FQU5UpwGb+gHmryGhbDsqYoyHzuVxaWUnNwyeLzxY8X r8RFc0avIuSyBwkXNBhLpIKFrDuCHWAz8ZCYJ729V7lMbqNXXi5QygczATrWazrHQuJhvmu/UAfl cT08hsdWX5+8tOtIOPRYtk40IgP6e7876I6ujgFTuSFK4TyxD+gu9HOVXfG8D4pogIIYoVbay6y2 I/lv1MiL0L6biL3YSWHhnNxqtbchorcF4hfVnskVk2v6UQ3YN6XP8G5PJ2xyJeZ8OHwIeYrEufnC 59rQBdDfjspfluQFOKG1liwOkoA3CAY1OR+BzYhRH/2QCpLHY0nl/il748Y+slv5Aly8UkE05wjt Xhkb7IFbjYu7UGWiEHwV2fo+NgKeZvIaO9Ke+0sWBj4UtBCJyMUAPeu2iFct9L5Eq9INsEvfr+MT +iqIuJm6WFqfgwu2S38qEpsf1ZbQCO5kZT0K5EO8iXYMV1FyIiOaQvnUSmTYjU70+h88f6URuRMh SXiv6xQ4c/DnUVadGQHsjRW6nicVHa+iQLiHaz95xGaDb7tVmejw0v2VyVspHWZ5yH8mWDuswFn9 U76H6LZfHFND23LNwdZ9YXGk0qeCeo0tXczDYc46IuCkERHfVodcWiv4oI/+xSS9pf/QVbdxICvu Xpo= =PpHo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----