Re: birtney changes
Colin Watson wrote:
Mm. I think so. On the one hand, dealing with architectures
independently there would make library transitions even more fluid, and
Mm, I don't think that's the case; leaving a useless libfoo0/i386 around
until libfoo0/m68k is unneeded doesn't make things any harder, unless
something libfoo0/i386 depends on needs to be removed, but that doesn't
affect libfoo0/m68k.
On the mutant third hand, it would be easier to see
what's preventing an OOD being removed if those happened
per-architecture, due to the way britney stops reporting uninstallables
at the alphabetically-first architecture.
It'd be easy to change that if you guys want. It'd make things a little
bit slower; but I don't think so much that you'd notice.
Cheers,
aj
Reply to: