On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 05:18:42AM +0000, Philip Charles wrote: > This is very much a concern of mine. What I was thinking of as an interim > measure was another line in the control file something like this:- > > Platform: linux, or Platform: hurd, or Platform: all (Platform: whatever)?
Platform "any". But it's a hack either way, so it makes sense to keep it simple and just extend the existing architecture field. The problem with a new header is that you can't keep backwards compatibility. In the current situation, having a new field value and using an old tool will probably return an error (it should ;). With the Platform field, old tools will not notice that they encounter a case they can't understand correctly. Maybe we decide that this is not something to care about. However, I have not thought this through. It's an interesting suggestion. Marcus -- `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de
