Re: multiple architectures
On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, Bart Trojanowski wrote:
> Of course not. Those things do not define the architecture.
> If a package is exim4, it is always exim4 regardless of what compiler
> and compiler options were used to build it -- it's dependencies do not
> change, nor do pre-depends, conflicts, suggests or recommends. However
> with hardware dependencies involved, I no longer know if I can install a
> package by looking at the filename.
> If dpkg is not to support sub-architectures (like amd64, etc) then the
> same package name, say coreutils_5.0-4_i386.deb, could potentially
> contain different hardware dependencies.
> I believe the package name is misleading since this particular
> coreutils_5.0-4_i386.deb may not be installed on i386 since it was built
> with the intent of use on DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE=x86_64-linux. The filename
> containing i386 seems counter intuitive.
> We can already see this in the kernel packages. The architecture is
> i386 yet the file is named kernel-image-2.4.20-3-k7_i386.deb. I predict
> that more packages will emerge containing the sub-architecture names in
> the version tag of the package and the architecture set to the base
don't confuse debian policy, and dpkg development. Dpkg doesn't care about
package names. We do care about dependency resolvment.