-On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 11:26:25PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Peter Samuelson wrote: > > [Jonathan Nieder]
> >> (I had always thought that in the multi-arch world "Arch: all" meant
> >> "with the same architecture as its dependencies".)
> > That's what they want you to think! No, for dependency resolution
> > purposes, arch:all is equivalent to arch:{dpkg's primary arch}. There
> > are arcane reasons for this, which I only half-understand so I can't
> > easily explain. The short version:
> > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MultiarchSpec#Dependencies_involving_Architecture:_all_packages
> Thanks for the pointer. Yuck.
> Multiarch folks: would it make sense to tweak the spec to require
> behavior matching the rationale
> "architecture-dependent packages may depend on Architecture:
> all packages and assume that the transitive dependencies will
> be resolved using packages of the same architecture or other
> packages that are Architecture: all"
> so that dpkg, apt, and aptitude can agree on what to do here?
No, because there's no practical way to enforce such a rule. apt and
aptitude have enough information to enforce it, but there are no provisions
in dpkg for recursive analysis at dependency resolution time.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
