On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 02:04:20AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 11:22:36AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: > > Indeed. As long as it's documented, people are probably going to be > > hand-selecting their APT entries, anyway, so it isn't such a big deal. > > > > [...] > > The Debian architecture will remain 'netbsd-i386', with the known issue > > that we'll have to resolve this at some point with the dpkg maintainers and > > the ftpmasters. > > Untill we resolve this, please take into consideration to avoid filing patches > that use "netbsd-i386" in a way that breaks the other port. I've been careful > to keep such incompatible patches without submitting, since I started.
A bit late for that, I'm afraid; they're already fairly pervasive,
particularly throughout the toolchain.
> You can fix build issues most of the times by using _GNU_SYSTEM instead of
> _ARCH variables, though. When it comes to [netbsd-i386] tags in Build-\
> Depends fields, both ports will want the same usualy.
Except in the case of things like libc. Which tend to pop up more than one
might imagine. Unfortunately, it's also true that quite a few maintainers
already have ARCH logic, and are not entirely amenable to just randomly up
and changing this because we can't figure out what we want to do.
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ,''`.
Debian GNU NetBSD/i386 porter : :' :
`. `'
`-
pgpzBs74eD2AI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
