Control: reassign -1 dpkg-dev/1.18.2 Control: retitle -1 dpkg-dev: Please add support for bits in arch wildcards
Hi! On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 15:18:30 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > Package: dpkg > Severity: wishlist > Version: 1.18.2 > we just had the 32bit arches in debian-bof, and two changes to dpkg > would help us: > > 1. Architectures linux-any-32 and linux-any-64 for the 32 and 64 bit > architectures respectivly. This would be a mess to deploy, would break the current convention of naming the triplets, and would make the already confusing wildcards even more confusing. Developers having to deal with such wildcards outside of dpkg, are already complaining that they cannot do simple string matches, embedding the bits there implies they are forced to parse the string, have to distinguish those from actual valid triplet components, and then parse and apply the information from the dpkg architecture table files. <https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/FAQ#Q._Can_we_add_support_for_a_new_dpkg_architecture.3F> <https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/TimeTravelFixes> Where would you need such wildcards, I'm assuming on very few very low level packages, such as boot loaders and similar? In any case, I can see that when this is needed, it would be way more convenient to use a bits-based wildcard, because it's more future proof, and should in principle be always up-to-date. OTOH, if this is for such low-level packages, then usually it requires explicit support for every and each port, so you have to track that manually most of the time anyway, and using such wildcards might be wrong. > 2. The possibility to exclude architectures, e.g. to write "any !i386" > instead of listing all other architectures explicitly. Please file one bug report per issue, otherwise it gets more difficult to deal with. This has been later fild as #797347, so I'll reply there, and ignore this part here. Thanks, Guillem
