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

Re: Architecture Field


On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 09:55:45 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jonathan Yu <jonathan.i.yu@gmail.com> writes:
> > I ask because the terminology sounds ambiguous -- the OS part is
> > "sometimes" elided, as when the OS is Linux. But that doesn't
> > necessarily mean that a missing OS part means the OS is assumed to be
> > Linux.
> I think what the wording is driving at is that the OS part doesn't have
> to be elided; in other words, you can use linux-s390 and it means the
> same thing as s390.  But if there's no OS part, it's always Linux.

That has not always been the case, only after the introduction of
architecture wildcards linux-<arch> has been supported as an
undocumented alias for <arch>.

I've always thought that eliding linux in the architecture was pretty
confusing for people, which tend to consider it any-<arch> instead of
linux-<arch>. And I added the alias with the intent to be able to
possibly fix that in the future, but never bothered pushing for it
given that such change is probably too contentious, probably as
confusing or more during the transition period, and because at the time
there was only hurd as the other non-linux architecture

Now that we have few non-linux architectures on the archive it might
be time to consider discussing it?


Reply to: