Hi, On Sat, 24 Dec 2011, Guillem Jover wrote: > * Multi-arch enabled frontends should always use arch qualified names > as dpkg input for possibly ambiguous package names, to cleanly support > a distinct native architecture between dpkg and frontend, and make > possible cross-grading. This means that “M-A: same” need to be always > arch-qualified on input to dpkg. Non “M-A: same” foreign arch > packages do not need to be arch-qualified, as their usage on dpkg > is never ambiguous, there will always be only one installed, but > they could get arch-qualified, that should never be a problem.
Yeah, there are cases where it's best to arch-qualify packages... for example you try to upgrade from a non "M-A: same" to a "M-A: same" package of another architecture. I gave the example of the test-suite where we want to be sure that the non "M-A: same" has really been fully replaced and that dpkg no longer considers it installed. > * During an upgrade to a multi-arch dpkg using a multi-arch enabled > frontend, the frontend cannot pass over arch-qualified pkgnames > to dpkg. It must verify if it can do so first by checking the > «dpkg --assert-multi-arch» exit code (as per my previous mail). I don't know how APT in squeeze behaves but the main problem pointed out so far is rather that it would use non-arch qualified package to refer to "M-A: same" packages of the native arch already installed and that dpkg should not blow up on this. > If we can agree so far, I'll send my other last part regarding pkgname > input. Go ahead ! :-) Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Pre-order a copy of the Debian Administrator's Handbook and help liberate it: http://debian-handbook.info/liberation/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111224091048.gh3...@rivendell.home.ouaza.com
