Re: inconsistent versions of M-A: same packages
Hi Josch,
On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 06:41:24AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Quoting Ralf Treinen (2014-11-07 17:35:06)
> > It just appeared to me that we probably do not have a syntax to pinpoint a
> > package built for a specific architecture. "We" meaning in this case dpkg,
> > apt, and dose (if I am not mistaken).
>
> No. We do have it.
[...]
> Dpkg and apt allow this just fine. Try to do:
>
> apt-get install --simulate gcc-4.9-arm-linux-gnueabihf
>
> And you will end up with a number of armhf packages on your system (you have to
> enable armhf beforehand of course).
Interesting, I did not know this. Is this documented somewhere? I just looked
through apt-get(1) man page and couldn't find it there.
> > Once we can teach dose to accept the pseudo packages as described above we
> > could run it with all the Packages files for all archiectures, which makes
> > roughly 500.000 packages.
>
> This might fail not only because of M-A:same conflicts but also because some
> packages just conflict with each other through a normal Conflicts:. You
> probably need a clever way to partition dependencies.
In my understanding these are precisely the cases which we want to find:
packages which are supposed to be co-installable for different archiectures
(since they are M-A=same), but which are not for some reason.
I'll answer about the encoding in dose on the dose-devel list.
Cheers -Ralf.
Reply to: