Re: [Multiarch-devel] cross-architecture conflicts or equivalent for libc packages

[Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>]

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 02:01:15PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>, 2014-05-19, 13:28:
> >>>i386            /lib/ld-linux.so.2
> >>
> >>Provides: lib-ld-linux-so-2
> >>Conflicts: lib-ld-linux-so-2
> >>Replaces: lib-ld-linux-so-2
> >
> >So following your way, it would be exactly the same for libc6:sparc.
> >
> >libc6-i386 also provides /lib/ld-linux.so.2. It should be
> >co-installable with libc6:i386, but libc6:sparc should not be
> >co-installable with libc6:i386 or libc6-i386.
> 
> Oh, right. Couldn't the biarch packages die already? :)

Unfortunately, as long as we keep GCC, we will need them, even if they
are a pain.

> If they can't, I suppose you can implement cross-architecture
> conflicts with plain conflicts against virtual packages:
> 
> Package: libc6
> Architecture: i386
> Provides: libc6-on-i386
> Conflicts: libc6-on-sparc, ...
> 
> Package: libc6-i386
> Architecture: amd64
> Conflicts: libc6-on-sparc, ...
> 
> Package: libc6
> Architecture: sparc
> Provides: libc6-on-sparc
> Conflicts: libc6-on-i386, libc6-i386, ...

Indeed we can encode the architecture in the Provides:. I guess we'll
have script that...

As a subsidiary question, do you know how to prevent libc6-amd64:i386 to
be installed on a native amd64 system, but allow it on an i386 system,
even with libc6:amd64 already installed?


-- 
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurelien@aurel32.net                 http://www.aurel32.net