Hello, On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 02:14:37PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > A lot has changed since this proposal, and I am uninformed, hence > curious: does it still make sense to reserve this namespace (maybe to > avoid causing trouble for existing users of dpkg-cross)?
Now that we are getting into multiarch days, and we might gain cross architecture dependencies I believe reserving such namespace is not needed. Also note that dpkg-cross'd packages are not to be released and we do not need to polute the official archive with them. Using path provided by dpkg-cross is arriving to its end, either by using multiarch paths in Debian world or setting up a sysroot path in upstream world (which is not compatible with current dpkg-cross). Note that the intention has always been to merge dpkg-cross usefulness into proper dpkg and throw away useless dpkg-cross bits, so it really needs to die. Best regards, -- Héctor Orón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110816210316.ga17...@flaco.tsc-farm.upc.es
