Re: Package names & LSB spec
On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 11:53:59PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 July 2003 20:10, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > This has changed. According to Chapter 24 of the LSB spec for AMD64
> > (http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/archLSB/AMD64/spec/swinstall.html), in order
> > to be LSB compliant, your package names must specify the architecture as
> > x86_64.
> I don't think that is easily possible because of the dpkg naming rules.
> In particular, I'm pretty sure that many tools, both official ones like
> the buildd infrastructure as well as home-grown ones, assume that there
> are exactly two '_' characters in the file name for a binary package.
> Using "x86-64" or "x8664" as the architecture name sounds even less
> useful since that would still be incompatible with LSB and also look
> stupid (and "x86-64" probably breaks some other tools even if it should
> conform to the debian policy).
I guess the hurd-i386 has found most of them, e.g. mini-dinstall got
fixed WRT dashes in architectures a while ago. Anyway, these are bugs
that should be fixed in the respective tools.
No idea what the right[tm] name for the dpkg-architecture is though.