Re: Arch names (was: APT archive)
> Take into account that Debian was never made for any other kernel than
> Linux. The Hurd port was only started in 1998 and we still have some
> problems with the linuxism of Debian.
>
> The architecture names is one example. It's just i386 and no way talks
> about the kernel. This wasn't a really big problem, as the Hurd
> currently runs only on i386 and we have thus only one architecture
> name. We simply use hurd-i386, but there is already some work going on
> to port the Hurd to powerpc, so we might have a hurd-powerpc in the near
> future. Now the BSDs are also coming to Debian, this is really going
> to be the problem with all netbsd architectures for example. :)
>
> There is already a wishlist item filed about it, but only the way
> suggested is not the Right Way IMHO:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=118910&repeatmerged=yes
>
> I propose a more flexible scheme. All ports should have the
> name <kernel>-<architecture>, i.e. hurd-i386, netbsd-alpha,
> linux-powerpc. Then add flexible handling of the port names in
> dpkg. You should be able to use the any and all files in the part of
> the filenames, for example:
I don't see your problem with the previous solution, nor how yours is flexible.
Rather, the proposed "Kernel:" tag has some advantages over your proposal,
namely that it's easier to parse (both for humans and machines) and that it's
more logical (the kernel isn't, strictly speaking, a part of the architecture,
which refers to the hardware).
> Architecture: any-any
Architecture: any
Kernel: any
> Architecture: all-all
> Architecture: linux-all
Architecture: all
Kernel: Linux
> Architecture: linux-any
> Architecture: all-alpha
Architecture: alpha
Kernel: all
> Architecture: i386-alpha
etc...
> Build-Depend: foo [all-i386]
> Build-Depend: bar [linux-all]
>
> And then then the way to solve the X problems:
> Build-Depend: kernel-headers-2.4 [linux-all]
I do agree, of course, that this functionality should also be built into the
Build-Deps. But that wouldn't necessarily be incompatible with a "Kernel:" tag,
e.g.
Build-Depend: kernel-headers-2.4.17-sparc [Arch: sparc; Kernel: linux]
> Note that kernel-headers should be linux-headers actually. :))
> Kernel-headers should be some meta package depending on the right
> headers for the right platform.
I agree with that, anyways. :)
- Michael
=====
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCS/MU d- s+:+ a--- C++ ULISBH+++ P+++ L++(-) E-
W--(+) N o? K? w--- !O !M V?> PS+++ !PE Y+ PGP-
t+(-) 5 X R+>+++ tv-- b++ DI(+) D G e->+++ h r-- y
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions!
http://auctions.yahoo.com
Reply to: