Re: Depends: libfoo:foreign ???
+++ Goswin von Brederlow [2013-05-09 11:39 +0200]:
> On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 08:43:22AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> > On 2013-05-09 07:56, Paul Wise wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> > >
> > >> I just noticed that we have the first amd64 package in the archive that
> > >> has dependencies on :i386 qualified libraries:
> > >>
> > >> Package: teamspeak-client
>
> A Depends like in this case is never right since it mixes biarch
> (libc6-i386) packages with multiarch (libfoo:i386).
This does seem wrong, especially in this case. I can't think of a case
where it makes sense offhand, but there might be one.
> I would say that a foreign dependency on a library is never right.
That's too strong. It can make sense for cross-tools, or maybe
emulators, which genuinely need a foreign-arch library to operate. But
I'm not aware of other sensible usages.
> If
> the source compiles binaries for the foreign arch then the package
> should be build on the foreign arch directly. Period.
Apart from the above exceptions, I agree.
We haven't yet formulated any policy on what is/isn't going to be
allowed/deemed sensible.
> Also, iirc, the use of foreign dependencies is only supposed to be on
> packages with Multi-Arch: allowed.
I don't think that's relevant/correct. A foreign-arch dep is
appropriate when the binary is linked against/uses said library, and a
same-arch libfoo-arch-cross isn't used instead. Said library could be a
perfectly normal M-A:same package.
I guess it's time to have a think about this stuff and write down some
guidelines/policy.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM
http://wookware.org/
Reply to: