Re: Bug#454057: please move dpkg-architecture
On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 09:42:17PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Dec 2007, Robert Millan wrote:
> > Please could you move dpkg-architecture from dpkg-dev to dpkg ? It seems that
> > because of this, it turns out that having the xorg meta-package installed
> > requires dpkg-dev and hence binutils (because of type-handling).
>
> dpkg-architecture is perl and the goal is rather to get rid of perl in
> dpkg than the contrary. So my first vote is against this change.
Note that it's trivial to re-write in bash, though.
> Why does xorg need dpkg-architecture ?
Because of type-handling. Maybe we should change that instead...
X11 maintainers, how would you feel about making 'xorg' a binary-arch
package so that it can use [] arch specifiers?
--
Robert Millan
<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)
Reply to: