On 02/03/14 06:56, Turbo Fredriksson wrote: > On Mar 2, 2014, at 4:52 AM, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > >> > Hostile binary takeover is not allowed - that is two separate source >> > packages should not build the same binary package names, even if on >> > different architectures. > Ok, sounds reasonable when you say it like that. I'd still appreciate a link > to the policy for that.
One possible example of theoretical breakage is to run the command "apt-get source libzfs1", right now it downloads the kfreebsd/zfsutils sources, but I don't know what will happen when zfs-linux is allowed into the archives. Is apt intelligent enough to pick the source corresponding to the binary package of the host arch?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
