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

Re: Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

+++ Ben Hutchings [2012-06-13 12:24 +0100]:
> On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 17:45 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Michael Gilbert <mgilbert@debian.org> wrote:
> > > In particular, I filed a bug against dpkg requesting that it produce
> > > more informative error messages in these cases [0], but I wonder if a
> > > part of the solution shouldn't be more automated or at least presented
> > > at a higher level through apt/aptitude, etc?
> > 
> > Chicken or the egg?
> > 
> > You need to upgrade to support MultiArch,
> > but you need MultiArch to upgrade…
> > (beside, how would the detection for such a message look like?)
> [...]
> > Maybe all maintainers who want to use Multi-Arch now in wheezy
> > (and therefore drop amd64 packages) should get together and write
> > a "what to do after the distribution upgrade" for the release notes,
> > a (low priority) debconf message and if you want to be really fancy
> > a "transitional" package which shows the same text in case the
> > "dropped" binaries are executed.
> [...]
> I'd be interested in this for linux-image-amd64:i386.  Currently I
> expect linux-image-3.2.0-<n>-amd64:i386 to remain in wheezy but we'll
> still need to advise the user to enable amd64 ready for wheezy+1.  If we
> can document multi-arch well enough in release notes etc. then it might
> be possible to drop it now.

I added a user-oriented HOWTO to the multiarch doc-collection last
month as there seemed to be a shortage of such docs to point to that
weren't cryptic specifications, or talking mostly about
cross-building. It may be a useful place to point people, or just lift
the good bits from it:


Principal hats:  Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM

Reply to: