While cross building for a different architecture (e.g. building wheezy-i386 in a buster-amd64 machine), all packages marked as "Architecture: all" in the control files are not built.
Replacing "Architecture: all" with "Architecture: any" does work, but we need to find a solution that works fine when either building a single distro/arch or all distros/archs.
While cross building for a different architecture (e.g. building wheezy-i386 in a buster-amd64 machine), all packages marked as "Architecture: all" in the control files are not built.
Replacing "Architecture: all" with "Architecture: any" does work, but we need to find a solution that works fine when either building a single distro/arch or all distros/archs.
Replacing “Architecture: all” with “Architecture: any” does work
This is only partially true, it seems it depends on the package section or multi arch too. For example in tqt3 the replacement works fine, but for the package libdbus-1-tqt-doc in dbus-1-tqt the architecture must remain "all". If changed to "any", the apidox target would not be built.
```
Replacing “Architecture: all” with “Architecture: any” does work
```
This is only partially true, it seems it depends on the package section or multi arch too. For example in tqt3 the replacement works fine, but for the package libdbus-1-tqt-doc in dbus-1-tqt the architecture must remain "all". If changed to "any", the apidox target would not be built.
I dare say that everything works exactly as it should. I build on one builder (amd64) for many architectures (amd64, i386, armel, armhf, arm64, mips, powerpc, ppc64el) and packages with "Architecture: All" are built just once for the architecture I have chosen as "main" for the distribution.
Here it is absolutely undesirable for packages with "Architecture: All" to be built for all architectures instead of only one => that would make binary different conflicting packages that would then not be imported into one repository common for all architectures.
I dare say that everything works exactly as it should. I build on one builder (amd64) for many architectures (amd64, i386, armel, armhf, arm64, mips, powerpc, ppc64el) and packages with "Architecture: All" are built just once for the architecture I have chosen as "main" for the distribution.
Here it is absolutely undesirable for packages with "Architecture: All" to be built for all architectures instead of only one => that would make binary different conflicting packages that would then not be imported into one repository common for all architectures.
MicheleC
removed this from the R14.0.7 release milestone 5 years ago
While cross building for a different architecture (e.g. building wheezy-i386 in a buster-amd64 machine), all packages marked as "Architecture: all" in the control files are not built.
Replacing "Architecture: all" with "Architecture: any" does work, but we need to find a solution that works fine when either building a single distro/arch or all distros/archs.
This is only partially true, it seems it depends on the package section or multi arch too. For example in tqt3 the replacement works fine, but for the package libdbus-1-tqt-doc in dbus-1-tqt the architecture must remain "all". If changed to "any", the apidox target would not be built.
I dare say that everything works exactly as it should. I build on one builder (amd64) for many architectures (amd64, i386, armel, armhf, arm64, mips, powerpc, ppc64el) and packages with "Architecture: All" are built just once for the architecture I have chosen as "main" for the distribution.
Here it is absolutely undesirable for packages with "Architecture: All" to be built for all architectures instead of only one => that would make binary different conflicting packages that would then not be imported into one repository common for all architectures.
Closed as invalid. Turned out the problem was on my configuration for pbuilder.
JPReisender referenced this issue 3 years agoMicheleC referenced this issue 7 months ago