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

Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all



Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> On 11/01/2008, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>> Note that this is the raw output of the script, packages which MUST be
>> arch all (debian-installer is excluded, because of technical reasons)
>> are listed below the list.
> 
> *MUST*, ahah.

Sorry, that is more like a "s/MUST/REALLY SHOULD" (strong should? :) 

> 
>> And here's the list of packages which after comparing the md5sum files
>> show no reason why they aren't arch all:
>> 
>> Grub Maintainers <pkg-grub-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org>
>>    grub
> 
> Again, there is a very good reason:
> | /usr/sbin/grub: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1
> | (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.6.1, dynamically linked (uses shared libs),
> | stripped
> 
>> Camm Maguire <camm@enhanced.com>
>>    hol88-library
> 
> So, again, *how* do you find it possible to list this package as MUST be
> Architecture: all, while it has things like that inside?
> | … cut …
> | /usr/lib/hol88-2.02.19940316/Library/pair/basic_ml.o: ELF 32-bit LSB
> | relocatable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), not stripped
> | /usr/lib/hol88-2.02.19940316/Library/pair/both1_ml.o: ELF 32-bit LSB
> | relocatable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), not stripped
> | usr/lib/hol88-2.02.19940316/Library/pair/both2_ml.o: ELF 32-bit LSB
> | relocatable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), not stripped … cut …
> 

There "MUST" be something wrong with the package then, how is that i386's
and amd64's md5sum are exactly the same?

>> Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org>
>>    grub (U)
> 
> Again…

Did you notice the "(U)"? ;)

> 
>> Masahito Omote <omote@debian.org>
>>    libuim-data
> 
> Sounds reasonable.
> 
>> Otavio Salvador <otavio@debian.org>
>>    grub (U)
>> Jason Thomas <jason@debian.org>
>>    grub (U)
> 
> Again…
> 
>> As usually, feedback is welcome.
> 
> Reiterating…
> 

Should probably compare i386 and something like armel next time.

I'm, again, sorry for those false positives (didn't expect them by comparing
md5sums of two different architectures).

Cheers,
Raphael Geissert



Reply to: