On Wed, 28 Dec 2011, Guillem Jover wrote: > So, regarding pkgname input: [...] > * An additional cross-arch problem relates to maintainer scripts doing > for example dpkg -L or -l (or other queries) on “M-A: same” packages, > because here what's important is either the arch of the package being > handled (independent from dpkg native arch) or the arch of the package > being queried (also independent from the native arch), so they need to > either arch-qualify the package they mean, or pkgname needs to mean > all installed instances, anything else will cause problems. In > addition the DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_ARCH envvar cannot be used because it's > not related to what's being queried, and --assert-multi-arch might > not be fully functional when called from maintainer scripts, so > handling the upgrade case if pkgname means native might prove rather > tricky as we might not be able to specify neither pkgname:arch nor > pkgname:*. > > The remaning solutions from the thread discussed up to now, taking the > above into account are:
What about my suggestion in 20111213094143.gc22...@rivendell.home.ouaza.com ? I think it respects all your points. The only limit is that "dpkg -L foo" might stop working once a second instance of the foo package is installed. But then that's ok, it just means that some program is not yet multiarch-aware and ought to be updated. In some cases, the update will be to use "foo:*" but it might not always be the right fix so we should not assume it implicitly. > But I think there's a third option that might satisfy everyone(?), which > is a mix of the above two: > > * Making pkgname mean all instances for installed packages, and only > the native instance for available packages. This makes the semantics > fully backward compatible (although internally inconsitent, but that > was already the case), it avoids the user ending up with cruft. This > would also make for a smoother upgrade, given that dpkg will only > handle to be installed packages as filenames and would not make it > possible to mess up on cross-arch setups. (pkgname:* for available > packages could mean all configured arches, for installed packages > it could be an alias to pkgname.) > > So how about this? Did I miss anything? Looks acceptable to me but I don't really agree that it's fully backwards compatible because anything that ends up meaning multiple packages for "pkgname" can't be backwards compatible for all programs which are querying dpkg. 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/20111228075408.gf28...@rivendell.home.ouaza.com
