Bug#675532: RFS: bilibop/0.1 (ITP #675467)
Hi,
quidame@poivron.org wrote (07 Jun 2012 12:53:34 GMT) :
>> The whole thing is arch:all, but some shell functions require a Linux
>> kernel shouldn't bilibop-common have a versioned dependency on Linux
>> kernel >= 2.6.37 (needed by backing_file_from_loop), and be
>> arch:linux-any instead?
> I don't know exactly how to do a versioned dependency on the kernel.
We don't need a versioned dependency, but we need to depend on the
*Linux* kernel.
> Additionally, changing 'all' by 'linux-any' leads to the creation
> of architecture dependent binaries (formally, by their names), but
> with exactly the same contents: shell scripts, udev rules, manpages
> and other plain text documents.
Sure. It's a tiny bit sad, but this set of packages is *not* arch:all,
given it does not work on kfreebsd-* architectures.
> So, I'm not sure that it is the best way. Maybe, for bilibop-common,
> Architecture: linux-any, and for the others, Architecture: all ?
This would for sure avoid some stupid duplication,
but it would nevertheless create a set of packages that are
uninstallable on some architectures, without that fact being made
clear to the users of those architectures.
So, really, I think the only sane way is to move everything (that is or
depends on bilibop-common) to arch:linux-any.
> Do you think a NOTE in the extended description and/or in the README
> could be sufficient ?
It would be sufficient to address the "minimal Linux kernel version"
requirement, but certainly not to address the "needs Linux" one.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
Reply to: