On 2017-11-20 20:47, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Mikulas Patocka, on lun. 20 nov. 2017 19:13:31 +0100, wrote: > > There is package libc6-amd64:i386 and libc6-amd64:x32 (which provide > > x86-64 libc in /lib64/). This package is not technically needed (because > > x86-64 libc is already installed in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/), but it is > > installed nonetheless because of some dependencies. > > The issue of libc6-amd64:i386 conflicting with libc6:amd64 is not new, I > tried to do it in the past, just to see, with the same kind of effect as > you had. > > The question is rather how that got pulled at all. What package thinks > it's a good idea to pull libc6-amd64? Apart from libc64* packages > (which should normally not get pulled either), I can see uc-echo which > should rather use foreign dependencies, and :i386 multilib packages > which don't really make sense to install either. > > I don't remember whether it was tried to make libc6-amd64:i386 conflict > with libc6:amd64 (and vice-versa for i386) to make sure that this > doesn't happen by misfortune?
Arch-qualified conflicts are not supported. What you can do is make libc6-amd64 and libc6:amd64 not coinstallable (by changing the Replaces into a Conflicts). Maybe it's time to do it and let GCC enjoy multiarch + multilib pain. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net