Re: smarter way to differ architectures needed?
On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 05:18:42AM +0000, Philip Charles wrote:
> This is very much a concern of mine. What I was thinking of as an interim
> measure was another line in the control file something like this:-
> Platform: linux, or Platform: hurd, or Platform: all (Platform: whatever)?
Platform "any". But it's a hack either way, so it makes
sense to keep it simple and just extend the existing architecture field.
The problem with a new header is that you can't keep backwards
compatibility. In the current situation, having a new field value and using
an old tool will probably return an error (it should ;). With the Platform
field, old tools will not notice that they encounter a case they can't
understand correctly. Maybe we decide that this is not something to care
However, I have not thought this through. It's an interesting suggestion.
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org email@example.com
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org firstname.lastname@example.org