On Do, 2010-06-10 at 15:19 +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> Package: python-apt
> Version: 0.7.94.2
> Severity: normal
>
> Ideally, though, I'd like source package records to be more like
> first-class citizens in apt/python-apt rather than feeling a bit like
> afterthoughts, and to have their own cache and wrapper objects so that
> e.g. apt.SourceCache()[src] can return an apt.Package.Source object,
> which might have methods like fetch_source() and
> install_build_dependencies() as well as offering attribute access.
> Would this be at all feasible?
I have an idea which rewrites source packages into binary ones, and
build-dependencies to standard dependencies.
Let's imagine we have the source package foobar:
Package: foobar
Architecture: any
Build-Depends: foo [i386], bar [amd64]
There are three solutions I can imagine:
[SOL-A] foobar:src:i386 depends on foo
foobar:src:amd64 depends on bar
[SOL-B] foobar:src depends on foo:i386 | bar:amd64
[SOL-C] foobar:src depends on foo[i386] | bar[amd64]
SOL-A should work right out of the box with all features APT supports,
SOL-B doesn't really work, and SOL-C would require lots of work. We
would strip out any information about architectures not listed in
APT::Architectures, though.
--
Julian Andres Klode - Debian Developer, Ubuntu Member
See http://wiki.debian.org/JulianAndresKlode and http://jak-linux.org/.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
