Re: Multiarch file overlap summary and proposal

2012-02-17 Thread Carsten Hey
* Russ Allbery [2012-02-16 14:55 -0800]: Carsten Hey cars...@debian.org writes: There are still files that differ that do not need to be fixed, for example documentation that contains it's build date. Every file that differs has to be fixed in the current multi-arch plan. Documentation

Re: Multiarch file overlap summary and proposal

2012-02-17 Thread Russ Allbery
Carsten Hey cars...@debian.org writes: * Russ Allbery [2012-02-16 14:55 -0800]: Every file that differs has to be fixed in the current multi-arch plan. Documentation that contains its build date is going to need to be split out into a separate -docs package. I doubt that ftpmaster would be

Re: Multiarch file overlap summary and proposal

2012-02-17 Thread David Kalnischkies
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 23:10, Carsten Hey cars...@debian.org wrote: * David Kalnischkies [2012-02-16 03:59 +0100]: On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 00:39, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:   it needs to find and remove foo:* foo:all (or foo:any) instead of foo:* would save the need to quote it.

Re: Multiarch file overlap summary and proposal

2012-02-17 Thread Jonathan Nieder
David Kalnischkies wrote: You generously left out the paragraph describing how APT should detect that the package foo is in fact a library and not, say, a plugin, a dev-package, a dbg-package or a future-coinstallable binary. And the foo:* default would be okay and intuitive for all of those?

Re: Multiarch file overlap summary and proposal

2012-02-17 Thread David Kalnischkies
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 15:46, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote: David Kalnischkies wrote: You generously left out the paragraph describing how APT should detect that the package foo is in fact a library and not, say, a plugin, a dev-package, a dbg-package or a future-coinstallable

Re: Multiarch file overlap summary and proposal

2012-02-17 Thread Jonathan Nieder
David Kalnischkies wrote: Why would it be intuitive to add a specific value for the arch attribute with apt-get install foo # arch |= native but remove all values of the attribute with apt-get remove foo# arch = ~all-architectures ? Isn't it more intuitive to have it this way:

Re: Multiarch file overlap summary and proposal

2012-02-17 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Jonathan Nieder wrote: David Kalnischkies wrote: Why would it be intuitive to add a specific value for the arch attribute with apt-get install foo # arch |= native but remove all values of the attribute with apt-get remove foo# arch = ~all-architectures ? [...] But I really think

Re: Multiarch file overlap summary and proposal

2012-02-17 Thread Carsten Hey
* David Kalnischkies [2012-02-17 17:20 +0100]: Why would it be intuitive to add a specific value for the arch attribute with apt-get install foo # arch |= native but remove all values of the attribute with apt-get remove foo# arch = ~all-architectures ? We had a similar discussion

Re: Multiarch file overlap summary and proposal

2012-02-17 Thread David Kalnischkies
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 19:53, Carsten Hey cars...@debian.org wrote: * David Kalnischkies [2012-02-17 14:15 +0100]: You generously left out the paragraph describing how APT should detect that the package foo is in fact a library ... My impression was that you think very library centric.  All

dpkg_1.16.1.2+ppc64_ppc64.changes ACCEPTED

2012-02-17 Thread Debian Ports Archive Maintainer
Maintainer: Dpkg Developers debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org Uploader: Hiroyuki Yamamoto yama1...@gmail.com Host: leda.debian.net Accepted: dpkg_1.16.1.2+ppc64_ppc64.changes Files: libdpkg-dev_1.16.1.2+ppc64_ppc64.deb dpkg_1.16.1.2+ppc64_ppc64.deb dselect_1.16.1.2+ppc64_ppc64.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE,