On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 12:56:39PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 07:28:37PM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote: > > Because it can't use just any partioning program, it uses a > > particular one (or, actually, a particular one, two, or three) > > depending on the architecture. If we depend on a virtual > > partitioning-program package, it could install parted-udeb only > > even though that doesn't work on that particular architecture. > > Am I missing something on subarchitecture vs. architecture here? Once again: > If parted is not (for our purposes) usable on hppa, we do not build it for > hppa. (That should be quite easy to change.) Likewise, we only build the > other udebs for the platform we intend it to be used on. Thus, there will be > one (and only one) udeb that provides "partitioning-program" (or > "preferred-di-partitioning-program" if you want :-) ) for each architecture, > and anna can easily pick that one.
On New World PowerPC systems, we use mac-fdisk. On PREP PowerPC systems, we use fdisk. Suppose that we implement your suggestion. anna sees that fdisk-udeb provides partitioning-program. It installs it. But wait, we are installing on a New World system. So partitioning fails. Easy to fix, right? Just don't make fdisk-udeb on PowerPC. So now I am installing on my (hypothetical) PREP system. anna installs mac-fdisk-udeb since that is the only package that provides partitioning-program. So partitioning fails. A virtual package dependency is not enough. -- Matty -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
