Re: Debian GNU [was: smarter way to differ architectures needed?]
On Tue, Apr 06, 1999 at 08:51:07AM -0600, Gordon Matzigkeit wrote:
> >>>>> Brian May writes:
>
> >> Why should all ports have to release at the same time? Why should
> >> we not allow different ports to depend on different versions of
> >> the same package?
>
> BM> So, you want to get rid of hamm,slink,potato,etc? How would you
> BM> keep track of stable vs unstable?
>
> I have utterly no idea. First let's change the dpkg technology. The
> archive organization should come later.
>
> Until there is a more elegant solution, we can just have dinstall map
> certain dependencies into certain locations:
>
> binary-i386: linux, hwarch-i386
> binary-m68k: linux, hwarch-m68k
> binary-alpha: linux, hwarch-alpha
> binary-sparc: linux, hwarch-sparc
> binary-arm: linux, hwarch-arm
> binary-hurd-i386: hurd, hwarch-i386
> binary-linux-all: linux
> binary-hurd-all: hurd
> binary-all: [default]
>
> It would be nice to change dinstall so that we can create new distros
> on the fly, but I think that's asking too much for an initial
> proposal.
>
> Seconders?
Seconded.
The problem now is to find someone that can understand where all this fits
into dpkg's source. Dpkg is very brittle (an over-hacked chunk of code).
Also, this *does* have the side effect of giving the ftp team hope for less
load in the future ;P. Richard should like that.
This is a good idea because: What if Hurd were suddenly forked, and some new
OS appeared under a different microkernel? If this OS still bore the name
Hurd, and the Hurd code was eventually merged to be source compatible with
multiple MK's, *then* what would happen???
We just add a pseudo-package for each microkernel. Added benefit, foresight,
flexibility.
--
..Aaron Van Couwenberghe... ..vanco@sonic.net.. ..aaronv@debian.org....
Berlin: http://www.berlin-consortium.org
Debian GNU/Linux: http://www.debian.org
"...Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing..."
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Reply to: