[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: thoughts on architectures

On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:

> > That should be correct. A distribution already is just a Package file with
> > references to files in the pool. No real change there. The difference would
> > seem to be in the generation of the Packages file.
> Yes, exactly.  And you need some differences in the algorithm that decides
> when to compile a package from source for a given architecture (the pool
> might contain a compatible but inferior binary package).

Maybe there should be several "layers" of Packages files.  The top layer
being a basic packages list used by a simple CD vendor like myself, a
second which contains more problematical packages that will run more or
less eg, specifically optimised packages for i686.  A third layer could
contain, for example, those that need some form of emulation.  These could
be called Packages, PackagesA, PackagesB and suitable modifications made
to dpkg.  I would imagine that there would have to be manual intervention
by the guru when installing from PackagesB. 

I realise that there would have to be some way of creating these Packages
files and that the basic problem has been moved to somewhere else, but as
a consumer, this is what I would like to see happen.


  Philip Charles; 39a Paterson Street, Abbotsford, Dunedin, New Zealand
   +64 3 488 2818        Fax +64 3 488 2875        Mobile 025 267 9420
     philipc@copyleft.co.nz - preferred.          philipc@debian.org
     I sell GNU/Linux & GNU/Hurd CDs.   See http://www.copyleft.co.nz

Reply to: