Re: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

[Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>]

Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:

> To cut the long story short, I agree with Steve's proposal on this:
>
> arm-linux-gnueabi_hf

What is the purpose of the underscore?  In other words, what is the
advantage over arm-linux-gnueabihf?  I worry that some tools may not
like it --- for example, package names like

 mlton-target-arm-linux-gnueabi_hf

are not allowed.  Which looks very much surmountable, but just in
case, it seems prudent to ask.

Just to be clear, this is not an objection (both triplets look fine to
me).  I ask in the hope of getting the rationale well documented.

Thanks,
Jonathan