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

Re: Debian for x86-64 (AMD Opteron)

Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 10 April 2003 16:43, Emile van Bergen wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 03:33:39PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:

> >
> > # echo x86-64 >> /etc/dpkg/legal-archs
> > # dpkg -i libgtk2-2.0-1_i386.deb
> > # dpkg -i lib64gtk2-2.0-1_x8664.deb
> libssl0.9.6-0.9.6c-2_i386.deb or
> libssl0.9.6-0.9.6c-2_i686.deb;
> on a x86-64 you'd have the choice between those same two plus
> libssl0.9.6-0.9.6c-2_x8664.deb

These two proposals have a significant difference. The first one
needs more changes to the individual library packages because it
changes not only the file names but also the package names. I'm
not sure how to best handle dependencies on this.

The second proposal would mean that dpkg will have to be changed
so it can install the same package for both x8664 and {i386,i686}
at the same time, which could prove difficult. The dependencies
here can basically stay the same (e.g. ssh will continue to
depend on libssl0.9.6 even on 64 bit), but dpkg and apt will have
to know about an additional dimension concerning dependencies, e.g.:

ssh (64 bit) depends on libssl0.9.6 (64 bit)
ssh (32 bit) depends on libssl0.9.6 (32 bit)
ssh (64 bit) depends on debconf (32 _or_ 64 bit)
libssl096-dev depends on libssl0.9.6 (32 _and_ 64 bit??)

> Of course, that's only the dpkg side of things; in any case, you'd still
> need a way to present the extra choices caused by legal-archs in
> dselect. How would that be done?

One way is to copy the system that rpm is using: every installation
sets the default architecture and the package manager has a static
translation tree with entries like this:

ia64   -> i686
x8664  -> athlon
athlon -> amdk6
athlon -> i686
amdk6  -> i586
i686   -> i586
i586   -> i486
i486   -> i386

When apt looks for a binary it starts at the configured architecture
and moves down the tree and installs the first available package it
can find.

	Arnd <><
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: