[Pkg-pascal-devel] defining architectures for fpc and lazarus ?

[Abou Al Montacir]

Hi,

On Sat, 2017-08-19 at 18:25 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi
> 
> On 19-08-17 13:02, Graham Inggs wrote:
> > On 19 August 2017 at 11:13, Paul Gevers <elbrus at debian.org> wrote:
> > > I was wondering if we should prevent this by
> > > defining the archs we build on until bug 859566¹ is fixed.
> > 
> > Are we sure that will avoid the problem?
> 
> Hmm. For a while I really was under the impression that it would, but
> now I try to phrase the answer to you, I start to doubt again. The issue
> is of course that there are "all" packages that even don't need arch
> dependent packages at all, so they are indeed added to the architecture
> packages list.
> 
> So, let's drop this idea again.
I'm lost in this thread. I'm not sure I've understood the real issue.
Also decruft bugs seem to be handled but FPC migration is still blocked.
-- 
Cheers,
Abou Al Montacir
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-pascal-devel/attachments/20170820/cbb72dcd/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-pascal-devel/attachments/20170820/cbb72dcd/attachment.sig>