[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Shall we state on naming (again)?



On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 08:04:43AM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
 
> > I don't think that we should create both bytecode and native
> > vesions of a package, unless there is a real need of our users
> > to have both available. If it is just for the ease of upgrade
> > than we should rather search for other solutions.
> 
> No, you don't understand.
... 
> So you see, the problem is not that much about wheter we will ship an
> bytecode version or no (we already ship 6 copies or so of them), but how
> to handle it so that it will be transparent for our users.

I think that apt-get install hevea must act the same way on all
architectures, i.e. install transparently either the bytecode or
the native version with respect to the architecture: the user
doesn't care.

It is impossible to make a arch:all package depend on a arch:any
one. So you cannot even make hevea depend on hevea-native.
The other solution is to make the native version depend on the
bytecode one ; the native (default) version would be empty on
architectures not supported.

As you can see, we did not find a proper solution yet.

Cheers,

-- 
Jérôme Marant <jerome@marant.org>
              <jerome.marant@free.fr>

http://marant.org
              



Reply to: