On Sun, 13 Jun 1999, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > The system you propose is fast to implement of course, but it will trap us > again in other limitations. It does not really solve the underlying problem > (Manoj would probably call it half-baken). It's not scalable and not overly > flexible in my eyes.
I have proposed nothing. I mearly stated that you cannot remove the meaning we place on the Architecture field, it is a technical limitation of our tools. > There are no Debian versions. There are some traditional defaults, butin the > end everyone uses what works for him. egcs package relies on i486, other on You call them traditional defaults, I call them the Debian versions of the names. Either way they are different from what gnu calls them. > Yes, I do. I also think that it is a step in the right direction. But then I > think that your idea is not radical enough, not going far enough. I think it > is the wrong place to put this information, too. apt should not be concerned > with this information (I also think that dpkg should not be. Both should > merely check existing dependencies/provides). I'm not sure that is a very good attitude, it is very very limiting in what can be done on behalf of the user if the tools have no idea what they are really doing. > If you agree, I will make up a patch for that. I am still interested in > discussion of any long term solutions, but I would prefer to do this outside > of this special problem getting apt to run on the Hurd proper :) Ok, make a patch for that. Jason
