Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2013-01-06 Thread Charles Plessy
Le Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 02:05:13AM -0600, Peter Samuelson a écrit : In bug #695229, I noted that an Architecture: all package really should be Multi-Arch: foreign. This led to an IRC discussion between Goswin, Steve L. and me in which I formulated the proposal: If a package is

Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2013-01-06 Thread Wookey
+++ Charles Plessy [2013-01-06 18:32 +0900]: Le Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 02:05:13AM -0600, Peter Samuelson a écrit : In bug #695229, I noted that an Architecture: all package really should be Multi-Arch: foreign. This led to an IRC discussion between Goswin, Steve L. and me in which I

Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2012-12-08 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 02:05:13AM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote: In bug #695229, I noted that an Architecture: all package really should be Multi-Arch: foreign. This led to an IRC discussion between Goswin, Steve L. and me in which I formulated the proposal: If a package is

Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2012-12-08 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:20:00AM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote: [Helmut Grohne] I ask you not to use this proposal for the following reasons: * Given a package it is now much harder to see whether it is tagged M-A or not. Especially you can no longer determine the tagging by simple

Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2012-12-08 Thread Jakub Wilk
* Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org, 2012-12-08, 14:18: it might be worth considering whether we could instead solve all the real instances of A-B-C/D in the archive by converting all B to Arch: any in wheezy, and then just allowing the package manager to treat *all* Arch: all packages as

Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2012-12-08 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 12:14:30AM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: * Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org, 2012-12-08, 14:18: it might be worth considering whether we could instead solve all the real instances of A-B-C/D in the archive by converting all B to Arch: any in wheezy, and then just allowing

Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2012-12-06 Thread Peter Samuelson
In bug #695229, I noted that an Architecture: all package really should be Multi-Arch: foreign. This led to an IRC discussion between Goswin, Steve L. and me in which I formulated the proposal: If a package is 'Architecture: all', and all its dependencies are 'Multi-Arch: foreign'

Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2012-12-06 Thread Helmut Grohne
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 02:05:13AM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote: In bug #695229, I noted that an Architecture: all package really should be Multi-Arch: foreign. This led to an IRC discussion between Goswin, Steve L. and me in which I formulated the proposal: If a package is

Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2012-12-06 Thread Peter Samuelson
[Helmut Grohne] I ask you not to use this proposal for the following reasons: * Given a package it is now much harder to see whether it is tagged M-A or not. Especially you can no longer determine the tagging by simple examination of package lists. That's fair. Though I imagine if

Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2012-12-06 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 02:05:13 -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote: In bug #695229, I noted that an Architecture: all package really should be Multi-Arch: foreign. This led to an IRC discussion between Goswin, Steve L. and me in which I formulated the proposal: If a package is