On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:49:33 +0100 Adeodato Simó <dato@net.com.org.es> wrote: (Please drop me from CC: where possible, -devel is fine for me. Keeping Julian in CC - not sure if he's subscribed to -devel but I'm confident you are, Adeodato.) > * Julian Andres Klode [Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:07:55 +0100]: > > > 4. An external location > > This is backward compatible too. The problem with this proposal is > > that it puts to a small group of people (if it would be implemented > > like some stuff we have already). Programs creating repositories > > would need to be changed to accept such a file. > > Programs creating repositories will need to be changed *no matter what > approach you take*, since the idea is precisely to modify their > behavior. They may have to be modified to grok "Architecture: all [i386 > amd64]", or Install-Architecture, or a file. True. > (This is also why, btw, I don't get Neil's wish for a "generic > solution". Every solution is going to need modifications everywhere one > wants it implemented.) Maybe - but if Debian decides on a standard method for how the solution must work, (and/or the results it must achieve), then each tool is free to implement the solution internally as suits the codebase. All I want is that standard - something that says that all tools need to behave in a particular manner or have support for acting in that manner. In that sense, the solution (the standard) is generic but each implementation varies without breaking compatibility. > But I already said in my other mail that a P-a-s like approach may not > be the best option, given the size of the problem. (Neil, I'm surprised > you haven't meet "P-a-s": http://buildd.debian.org/quinn-diff/Packages-arch-specific.) I wasn't aware of that. Interesting. Is it documented somewhere in the Developer Reference etc. or linked from the Developer's Corner on www.debian.org ? > An arch:all package should be installable anywhere where its > dependencies can be satisfied. And if they can't be satisfied, dpkg/apt > will refuse to install it already. That is the problem I would like to solve - I don't want any packages in the Packages.gz file that cannot be installed. As noted by Adeodato, this involves tools like edos-debcheck. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
Attachment:
pgpUYPJ1RBYDh.pgp
Description: PGP signature