On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 01:50:38PM +0000, KatolaZ wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 04:41:54PM +0300, Hleb Valoshka wrote:
> > On 11/28/17, Svante Signell <svante.signell@???> wrote:
> >
> > >> > Well, the git files I sent to you are lintian clean. I'll get the git
> > >> > sources, fix them and send you a patch. Should we go back to
> > >> > Architecture:
> > >> > all?
> > >
> > > Yes. I see that you already did that.
> >
> > NO! NO! NO! And once more: NO!
> >
> > Have you tested multiarch system upgrade with udev built for `all'? I
> > know the answer: no. Because if you guys tested this you would know
> > that this is impossible.
> >
>
> I have tested it (and not just me), and it worked. Can you please
> explain what is wrong?
>

Just to make it clear, the recommendation for renaming debian packages
is to be found here:

https://wiki.debian.org/RenamingPackages

where you can read:

"Note that the package does not contain any architecture specific
files anymore and therefore the Architecture is set to all, even if it
was any before."

So it seems that using Architecture: all is totally legit, well, even
recommended.

My2Cents

KatolaZ

-- 
[ ~.,_  Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ - Devuan -- Freaknet Medialab  ]  
[     "+.  katolaz [at] freaknet.org --- katolaz [at] yahoo.it  ]
[       @)   http://kalos.mine.nu ---  Devuan GNU + Linux User  ]
[     @@)  http://maths.qmul.ac.uk/~vnicosia --  GPG: 0B5F062F  ] 
[ (@@@)  Twitter: @KatolaZ - skype: katolaz -- github: KatolaZ  ]