Re: packages which can be arch: all and arch: any ...

[Sven LUTHER <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>]

On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 07:38:05PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Sven LUTHER wrote:
> > Well, what about the coq for example, which is 7 MB package (on i386, so
> > maybe it is bigger for other arches) and 20MB installed.
> 
> I guess it's on the line.

I thought so, But sure, this is the biggest project using ocaml. More
may come in the future though. I think the rate of ocaml programs being
made available is increasing, at least i see that from the announcement
that are being made, and many of them are not yet packaged.

> > There is also the buildd resources, especially on the slower
> > arches. I guess it takes much time to build coq on m68k for example,
> > while i could have built the exact same executable on my i386 box.
> 
> So build all the bytecode architectures on your i386 box. :-) It
> actually is doable.

Mmm, and upload 5 versions of it ? I now have ADSL, but i guess people
with slow modems will be not at all happy about proposing a solution
like that.

BTW, I don't only propose this for me, but there are a few maintainers which
package ocaml stuff and which are more directly concerned than me. I am
just writing a policy proposal for all things related to ocaml, so each
package related to it will be packaged with a uniform way, without too
much surprise for our users.

> > > If you really wanted to solve this one right, you could think about
> > > implementing Marcus Brinkman's idea that lets packages depend on their
> > > architecture(s). That's nice because it solves the general problem you
> > > are running into: That of arch "all" packages that are really only
> > > useful on a subset of architectures.
> > 
> > Mmm, do you have a pointer to were i can look more at this ideas.
> 
> I haven't been able to dig it up easily.

Ok, i will look at it.

Thanks for your help,

Friendly,

Sven Luther