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

Re: dpkg and debhelper patches for lib64 support



Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Gerhard Tonn wrote:
> 
> > >  Package: aalib1
> > > +Package64: lib64aalib1
> > >  Architecture: any
> > >  Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}
> > >  Description: ascii art library
> > >
> > > I would rather maintain a separate copy of this stanza for the 64 bit
> > > package. This would also let me give it a useful description.
> > >
> >
> > Again, I think, this creates a lot of redundancy, since 99 per cent of the
> > information of both packages are identical. If we add another copy for the 64
> > bit package, it is open how to name the Architecture for the 64 bit as well
> > as for the 32 bit variant.
> 
> Package: libfoo1
> Description: ${description}
>  This package contains the 32 bit version of the foo library.
> 
> Package: lib64foo1
> Description: ${description}
>  This package contains the 64 bit version of the foo library.

That was already more or less proposed, and shot down. What do you
suggest goes in the Architecture field of lib64foo1?

-- 
see shy jo

Attachment: pgp3Y3CQOK_UD.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: