Bug#337034: Finding the right architectures
On Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 02:54:02PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> jeroen <jeroen@debian.org> writes:
>
> > Replace r561 (surpress dpkg-source warnings in testsuite) by surpressing
> > the generation of such warnings in lintian itself, which requires latest
> > dpkg-dev. We're not sarge-safe anyway, so...
>
> Hm... so, if we're depending on the latest dpkg-dev, that does open the
> possibility of applying the patch already in this bug (#337034) without
> making it work with sarge's dpkg as well. (Well, there are some things
> broken about that patch, but something close to it at least.)
>
> However, looking at this, now I'm not so sure that this is the right thing
> to do at all, particularly given the recent discussion about how lintian's
> output should be predictable and consistent. Pulling architectures from
> the dpkg files means that the output will depend on what version of dpkg
> you have installed.
>
> I think having these values coded in lintian is not actually the worst
> idea, and may be better than pulling them from dpkg files. This is
> particularly the case since this patch uses /usr/share/dpkg/archtable to
> figure out what the standard architectures are, but the dpkg changelog
> says that file is deprecated.
Yeah, I'm strongly in favour of having lintian having its own knowledge
of what arches are acceptable. W.r.t. the dpkg-dev dependency, I'm
running the latest lintian on lintian.d.o now by simply dropping the -q
option, and having lintian use the installed (sarge) dpkg anyway.
> Right now, I'm inclined to do something similar to this patch in terms of
> recognizing arbitrary combinations of os and cpu, but not pull the data
> from external files and instead still include it in lintian itself. Does
> anyone have any other ideas or input on that?
I agree, in as far as we want to be quite lenient in accepting weird
architectures. But well, people seem to be insistent on adding all sorts
of archs to Debian that really are not in Debian itself yet, and it
doesn't actually hurt (except for a few wasted bytes). So I'm file with
following this course of action.
--Jeroen
--
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Reply to: