Bug#1084908: arch:all linux-libc-dev causes problems to architecture bootstrap

[Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org>]

Hi Bastian:

> > Something like this?
> > 
> > | Provides:
> > |   linux-libc-dev-supports (= amd64-0),
> > |   linux-libc-dev-supports (= arm64-0),
> > |   linux-libc-dev-supports-multiarch (= aarch64-linux-gnu-0),
> > |   linux-libc-dev-supports-multiarch (= x86-64-linux-gnu-0),
> 
> Using Provides is the natural approach indeed. Encoding the architecture
> into the version may technically work, but it feels really strange.
> Earlier, I proposed encoding it into the provided package name like
> linux-libc-dev-arm64-cross, but we all know how that went and I would
> not have proposed it if I had seen how it broke other pieces. Still if
> we were to just drop the "-cross" suffix and go for a very similar
> version.
> 
> Provides: linux-libc-dev-amd64, linux-libc-dev-arm64, ...

We have two proposed provides schemes here, can we select one and add
it?

> As stated elsewhere, I still don't understand what we gained by
> switching from Arch:any to Arch:all, but maybe I don't have to. A
> solution that adds any of these Provides is what I'd call good enough in
> practical terms for the purpose of bootstrapping.

It would be helpful if this question could be answered. I think Matthias
was asking the same question in #1081826.

-- 
Stefano Rivera
  http://tumbleweed.org.za/
  +1 415 683 3272