Re: Towards multi-arch: "Multi-Arch: same" file conflicts
Hi,
On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 03:26:21PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 20:03:27 +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
>
> > If a package is marked as "Multi-Arch: same", files with the same
> > name have to be (byte-to-byte) identical across all architectures.
> > Unfortunately, not all packages obey this requirement. I set up a
> > page to track violators:
> >
> > http://people.debian.org/~jwilk/multi-arch/same-md5sums.txt
> > http://people.debian.org/~jwilk/multi-arch/same-md5sums.ddlist
> >
> I've just filed a number of bugs (~60) based on this list, excluding
> binNMUed packages and packages affected by #647522.
Yep, I got it :-) And you answered to my question:
> > Is there any generic solution for GTK girepository files?
> >
> You should remove the multi-arch: same control field, gir packages are
> not ready for multiarch for now.
I also see for libopencc1 (not mine but I am watching it...)
[libopencc1 0.3.0-2]
usr/share/locale/zh_CN/LC_MESSAGES/opencc.mo
2c2024df5378074f4727948eb7133516 mips s390 sparc s390x powerpc
6a7df4d7f1f5383bd7461de8a0bb4957 kfreebsd-amd64 i386 armel armhf ia64 kfreebsd-i386 mipsel amd64
usr/share/locale/zh_HK/LC_MESSAGES/opencc.mo
66224514d0c66fd34bfbf95becf8cfd0 kfreebsd-amd64 i386 armel armhf ia64 kfreebsd-i386 mipsel amd64
6c6698b86bbf568baefc414d178108a0 mips s390 sparc s390x powerpc
usr/share/locale/zh_TW/LC_MESSAGES/opencc.mo
a7fe10a01d59cb26825678bb6c9c2402 kfreebsd-amd64 i386 armel armhf ia64 kfreebsd-i386 mipsel amd64
d26ada42ce92c0cea19f4705ca89d433 mips s390 sparc s390x powerpc
I guess the solution should be the same for now.
For these issies, I wonder 2 things:
* These generated non-code data which depend on arch need some generic
solution. Is there any wiki-page summarizing these. I understand it
is non-trivial thing and it certainly requires cordinated efforts.
* If I vaguely remember, I added this for my package due to the lintian
warning. We certainly needs to fine tune text so we do not add
these.
Osamu
Reply to: