Re: Challenge to you: Voice your concerns regarding systemd upstream
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 09/29/2014 at 05:49 PM, lee wrote:
> Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> What's wrong with the current multiarch implementation in your
>> option? I'm really curious as all multiarch complains I've seen
>> so far (barring actual package limits) were easily solved just
>> by reading an appropriate man page (or Debian wiki page). And,
>> IMO, Debian's current multiarch is way more flexible than current
>> Fedora's one.
>
> I don't know what the current state of either is other than that
> there are a lot of packages in Debian that depend on some
> multiarch package for unknown reasons.
Can you give any examples?
I thought cross-arch package dependencies were still forbidden, as of
the last time the subject came up on -devel or -policy, largely for the
reason that you can't guarantee that the foreign architecture in
question will be enabled on any given user's system.
> It doesn't matter anyway because the current state won't make any
> better what happened.
I'd be interested in details of what you saw happen when multiarch was
introduced, beyond the still limited summary form you've provided in
another mail. It doesn't seem to match anything I saw, or anything I've
previously seen anyone report having seen.
- --
The Wanderer
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1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=VaKM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: