Re: Sparc release requalification
- To: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>
- Cc: Jurij Smakov <jurij@wooyd.org>, debian-sparc@lists.debian.org, Philipp Kern <pkern@debian.org>, Debian Release <debian-release@lists.debian.org>, debian-s390@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Sparc release requalification
- From: Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:33:32 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20090819143332.GA22965@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org>
- Mail-followup-to: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>, Jurij Smakov <jurij@wooyd.org>, debian-sparc@lists.debian.org, Philipp Kern <pkern@debian.org>, Debian Release <debian-release@lists.debian.org>, debian-s390@lists.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 4A8BE82C.9030400@debian.org>
- References: <20090818204335.GA6874@droopy.oc.cox.net> <[🔎] 4A8BDF14.9090504@debian.org> <[🔎] 20090819114240.GA18361@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org> <[🔎] 4A8BE82C.9030400@debian.org>
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 01:55:24PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 19.08.2009 13:42, Bastian Blank wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 01:16:36PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> I did speak with Martin Zobel at Debconf on how to get there, having two proposals:
>>> - have an inplace-transition building required library packages for an
>>> upgrade as biarch packages and continue to use the current sparc name.
>> This would mean that many packages needs to be modified. Is it really
>> worth the work needed if we consider the availability of multiarch in
>> the next time?
> you'll end up modifying a different set of packages for the new
> architecture name in control and rules files. I don't know if this is
> less or more work.
If I understand this correctly, this would need the modification off all
library packages to implement biarch semantic.
Bastian
--
Star Trek Lives!
Reply to: