On 11/01/2008, Raphael Geissert wrote: > There "MUST" be something wrong with the package then, how is that > i386's and amd64's md5sum are exactly the same?
I don't see this that way. There *might* be a problem in your script or so. ,---[ let's check ]--- | [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp/grub$ wget -q http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/grub/grub_0.97-29_i386.deb | [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp/grub$ wget -q http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/grub/grub_0.97-29_amd64.deb | [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp/grub$ for i in amd64 i386; do ar x grub_0.97-29_$i.deb control.tar.gz; tar xfz control.tar.gz; mv control control.$i; mv md5sums md5sums.$i; rm control.tar.gz; done | [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp/grub$ diff -u md5sums.* | diffstat | md5sums.i386 | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------ | 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-) `--- Note that the i386 package has the following additional Depends line, compared to the amd64 one. | +Depends: libc6 (>= 2.5-5), libncurses5 (>= 5.4-5) I guess your scripts are somehow assuming that if one has an empty Depends line, the other has an empty line as well, or something similar. Back to grub: Unfortunately, there's no amd64 log (source upload along with the built binaries…), but it might be that ${shlibs:Depends} weren't computed correctly or so, so that the Depends line was left empty. Indeed, checking a cowbuilder build log: | dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${shlibs:Depends} In an amd64 chroot, looking closer: | $ file debian/grub/usr/bin/mbchk | usr/bin/mbchk: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.6.8, statically linked, stripped That's also the case for the other binaries, so it results apparently (I'm no grub maintainer at all) correctly in an empty Depends: line. > Did you notice the "(U)"? ;) Yes. I actually expected somehow that you could have noticed that it was about “grub”. > I'm, again, sorry for those false positives (didn't expect them by > comparing md5sums of two different architectures). I'm not blaming because of false positives. I'd expect more common sense. Either grub is architecture-dependent, being a low-level stuff, probably written in C (I know, that might sound like a cliché, but…), or it is just made out of supercowpowered architecture-independent shell scripts, but then one might wonder a bit. Seen where it belongs in a boot sequence? Reviewing such a short list takes some minutes (to compare with the time you spent on setting up these scripts), using the main measure when it comes to being “Architecture: all” or “Architecture: any”: its *content* (but you know that, I've been repeating this from the very beginning). -- Cyril Brulebois
pgpepixF2jE2I.pgp
Description: PGP signature
