Bug#509702: Source architecture field?

Guillem Jover guillem at debian.org
Thu Nov 25 18:18:04 UTC 2010


Hi!

On Thu, 2010-11-25 at 16:25:35 +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> In #509702, Philipp Kern says that a particular package's list of
> architectures should be specified in the source stanza of the control
> file, not in the binary packages' descriptions, to avoid any attempt
> to build the package on the rest of the architectures.

buildd should be looking at the Architecture field in the .dsc file,
not the debian/control file, AFAIK.

> While this sounds as a very sensible idea, is this actually allowed and
> used?  From the wording of Policy 5.2 it seems that the Architecture
> field is only allowed in the binary package paragraphs, and not in
> the Source one.  However, since I seem to remember some connection
> between Philipp Kern and the Debian autobuilders, I'm inclined to
> believe that he knows what he's talking about ;) and the autobuilders
> will actually honor a list of architectures in the source stanza.
> (A side point is that Policy 5.2 does not list other fields that it is
> possible to put in the Source stanza, like Vcs-*, but that's another
> kettle of beer)
> 
> So... should Policy 5.2 also list Architecture in the source stanza,
> or should #509702 be closed with "unfortunately this is not allowed"? :)
> (of course, the former option would be preferable if it actually works :)

It's really not allowed, and dpkg-dev will just not honour it anyway,
so the bug report seems confused. I've CCed Philipp, as maybe the
report was about something else, and he wrote something different from
what he meant?

regards,
guillem





More information about the Pkg-games-devel mailing list