Re: A Radical Multi-Arch Counter-Proposal
Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org> writes:
> On Jan 24, 2004, at 14:27, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
> > I'm against requireing both libs to be the same version. I don't
> > (yet?) see the neccessity for that.
>
> Well, I do, in that coalesce is going to be more likely to break with
> different versions, and apt certainly can't check md5sums before even
> downloading.
>
>
> >
> > Noone has yet pointed out a lib package with a conffile so lets stop
> > worrying about this.
>
> They're not too hard to find. For example:
>
> anthony@bohr:anthony$ dpkg -S /etc | tr ' ' '\n' | grep ^lib
> libggi2,
> libxt6,
> libgii0,
> libcupsys2,
> libao2,
> liborbit0,
> libgtk2.0-common,
> libgnome2-common,
> libpango1.0-common,
> libgnomevfs2-common,
> libbonobo2-common,
> libfnlib0,
> libgtk1.2-common,
Are those going to be installed for multiple archs anytime soon?
Depends on how far the biarch instabillity is going.
> libldap2,
Maybe needed soon.
> libc6,
> libpam-runtime,
> libpam-modules,
> libreadline4,
Needed.
Damn you, why did you look? Now we have to care. :)
> OK, a bunch of those are -common, etc. so they won't actually be
> problems. The others, well, I wouldn't object to them gaining a
> -common.
Yep. I prefer having a common to avoid or at least minimise the file
overlaps to a minimum.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: