Re: Bug#535645: Wrongfull removal of ia32-libs-tools

[Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>]

* Goswin von Brederlow (goswin-v-b@web.de) [090810 00:17]:
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MultiarchSpec#Filesystem layout
> 
> I believe wine is the first package that is experimenting with using
> that.

I belive wine is rather totally broken as of now:
aba@ries:~$ dpkg-deb --contents pool/main/w/wine/libwine-nas_1.1.24-2_i386.deb
drwxr-xr-x root/root         0 2009-08-09 09:05 ./
drwxr-xr-x root/root         0 2009-08-09 09:05 ./usr/
drwxr-xr-x root/root         0 2009-08-09 09:05 ./usr/share/
drwxr-xr-x root/root         0 2009-08-09 09:05 ./usr/share/doc/
drwxr-xr-x root/root         0 2009-08-09 09:05 ./usr/share/doc/libwine/
lrwxrwxrwx root/root         0 2009-08-09 09:05 ./usr/share/doc/libwine-nas -> libwine
aba@ries:~$


> I want to be clear here. The plan I gave is the transition plan from
> ia32-apt-get to multiarch.

I think you missed the bit about "accepted by the community at large".
Changes like multiarch cannot just be driven by a single person
without any buyin.

> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/07/msg00060.html -
> >   ftp-masters on removal
> 
> Also about the dpkg/apt diversion and taking over ia32-libs. Or so I
> assumed. That mail was following the discussion on irc [...]

I'm not going to say now that I think that the ftp-team had the best
strategy for communicating that decision. That doesn't make the
decision wrong however. I'm definitly not going to override a decision
just for the reason that the way it was taken wasn't optimal,
especially if after careful review the decision seems to be the right
one.



Cheers,
Andi