+++ Goswin von Brederlow [2013-05-09 11:39 +0200]: > On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 08:43:22AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote: > > On 2013-05-09 07:56, Paul Wise wrote: > > > On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > > > > > >> I just noticed that we have the first amd64 package in the archive that > > >> has dependencies on :i386 qualified libraries: > > >> > > >> Package: teamspeak-client > > A Depends like in this case is never right since it mixes biarch > (libc6-i386) packages with multiarch (libfoo:i386).
This does seem wrong, especially in this case. I can't think of a case where it makes sense offhand, but there might be one. > I would say that a foreign dependency on a library is never right. That's too strong. It can make sense for cross-tools, or maybe emulators, which genuinely need a foreign-arch library to operate. But I'm not aware of other sensible usages. > If > the source compiles binaries for the foreign arch then the package > should be build on the foreign arch directly. Period. Apart from the above exceptions, I agree. We haven't yet formulated any policy on what is/isn't going to be allowed/deemed sensible. > Also, iirc, the use of foreign dependencies is only supposed to be on > packages with Multi-Arch: allowed. I don't think that's relevant/correct. A foreign-arch dep is appropriate when the binary is linked against/uses said library, and a same-arch libfoo-arch-cross isn't used instead. Said library could be a perfectly normal M-A:same package. I guess it's time to have a think about this stuff and write down some guidelines/policy. Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM http://wookware.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130509155927.gv2...@stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk
