Re: Naming a 32-bit/64-bit specific Java package
Hi
On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 01:41:22PM +0000, Matthew Johnson wrote:
...CUT...
> >I think having two arch:all packages is better than having 12 arch:any
> >packages where they fall onto two sets of identical apckages.
> >
>
> I'd actually go for 12 arch:any packages myself, it's an implementation
> detail the users don't need to see.
Agree.
> Alternatively, is it possible to detect at runtime and load different
> things on different architectures?
That would be the best thing, but maybe not that easy to implement, or?
> Is it possible to upload two different versions of the any package to
> the different architectures? So that you get the -64 version on 64bit
> archs and the -32 version on 32 bit archs? It's definitely possible to
> have different versions in the archive for different architectures.
Not unless you make them arch specific, and then you do not really have any
benefit from it anyway.
If you have defined it arch: all, then that means that it will work
on _all_ architectures (if you have fullfilled the dependencies).
If you have something that depend on 32 vs 64 bit then it is not
architecture independent.
We could of course try to optimize and introduce a new category
32 bit and 64 bit, but I do not think it is that interesting to have
that, especially if it is just a few (or one) package there.
Regards,
// Ola
--
--------------------- Ola Lundqvist ---------------------------
/ opal@debian.org Annebergsslingan 37 \
| opal@lysator.liu.se 654 65 KARLSTAD |
| +46 (0)54-10 14 30 +46 (0)70-332 1551 |
| http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 |
\ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 /
---------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: