On 11/16/2012 01:39 PM, Colin Watson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:06:35PM -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> I think all that's needed to make grub-ieee1275-bin multiarch is to move >> the Depends: powerpc-ibm-utils, powerpc-utils, bc to Recommends: for >> non-powerpc architectures. Do we actually need bc in there on any >> architecture, since powerpc-ibm-utils itself depends on bc? > > Isn't the right answer to make these packages Multi-Arch: foreign > instead?
That won't work for bc (because /usr/bin/bc will collide), and it doesn't seem particularly reasonable make powerpc-utils or powerpc-ibm-utils because the binaries they provide actually won't run on a non-powerpc architecture. further complicating matters, powerpc-utils:powerpc actually collides with util-linux:i386, as they both provide (at least) /usr/share/man/man8/clock.8.gz (see http://bugs.debian.org/693395). vorlon told me there's not currently a way to specify cross-architecture conflicts (so apt doesn't even know about that conflict), but even if there were, i wouldn't want to have to choose between util-linux:i386 and powerpc-utils:powerpc on my i386 system. i think i know which would win out :) Do you see a problem with the approach i proposed? Can you help me see why grub-ieee1275-bin:powerpc Depends: directly on bc in the first place? --dkg
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
