Re: Bug#454057: please move dpkg-architecture
On Wed, 05 Dec 2007, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > Or we can change type-handling too. Apparently xorg only uses the fact
> > that type-handling provides not+sparc but it doesn't use the type-handling
> > program which is the real user of dpkg-architecture. Is that right?
>
> Yes, that's correct.
>
> > Maybe type-handling could be split with an empty package whose sole
> > purpose is to "Provides" some virtual packages while type-handling
> > stays the program with its dpkg-dev dependency.
> >
> > I think this solution would be my first preference.
> >
> My preference would be for dpkg to allow 'Depends: foo [arch]' in arch:all
> packages, but failing that, I agree.
Right now the support for the "[arch]" syntax is only in the perl code
and not at all in the C part that concerns dpkg. Adding it there is a
non-trivial effort and would probably also require changes in apt-based
software.
Aurélien, what do you think of the idea of change concerning type-handling ?
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
Reply to: