Re: dpkg and debhelper patches for lib64 support
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Gerhard Tonn wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 June 2003 04:26, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> > > I like this idea. It has reach.
> >
>
> I also like this idea.
>
> I am not sure about the remapping. I will give it a try and see if there are
> any pitfalls. We need at least a more generic architecture specification,
> e.g. anylib64 and !anylib64.
>
> Adam, can you tell us more about the planned remapping support for dpkg 2.0.
> BTW., is the source for dpkg 2.0 available somewhere?
Er, we have this wonderful system called cvs. It's cool.
Also, consider this, for depending on runtime cpu features:
Depends: {cpu:mmx}, libc6 (>= 2.3)
Conflicts: {cpu:sse}
{} are used to escape the current package namespace.
Reply to: