On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 12:47 +0100, Wookey wrote: > +++ 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 <email@example.com> wrote: > > > > In particular, I filed a bug against dpkg requesting that it produce > > > > more informative error messages in these cases , 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: > > http://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/HOWTO That's quite good, but for release notes I think we would need something that more tersely explains what multiarch means and that you *must* enable it if you have certain packages installed on certain architectures. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Computers are not intelligent. They only think they are.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part