On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 03:56:19 -0400, Andreas Grapentin wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:58:28AM -0600, Isaac David wrote: > > more precisely, Arch's arch=(any) packages may override > > existing ALARM or Arch32 pkgnames -- they are given priority > > and all architectures are meant to use archlinux-keyring. > > i don't expect this scenario to surface often in practice, > > since both ALARM and Arch32 follow Arch, not the other way > > around. > > > > on the other hand, ALARM and Arch32's arch=(any) packages aren't > > allowed to override Arch's arch=(any) stuff, nor each other's. > > > > this is the relevant code: > > > > https://git.parabola.nu/packages/dbscripts.git/tree/db-import-pkg?id=78fd5a0ca15cedc369ffd6c8035fd573ca253d76#n124 > > https://git.parabola.nu/packages/dbscripts.git/tree/db-import-pkg?id=78fd5a0ca15cedc369ffd6c8035fd573ca253d76#n304 > > Isn't this asking for trouble when arch32 or alarm make significant > changes to an -any package, required for it to function correctly on the > respective platforms?
If significant changes are needed to make it function on a different architecture, then it shouldn't be an arch=(any) package. > This might never happen though, so it's probably okay, but one of these > days we should probably check for this, to be safe :) -- Happy hacking, Luke Shumaker _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@lists.parabola.nu https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev