On 03.05.2016 11:33, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 11:23:40AM +0200, Francois Gouget wrote:
So I looked to see whether the Debian Policy was saying multi-arch is a
should, a must or something else.
It turns out it does not say anything of value: multi-arch is mentioned
as being a
+++ Simon McVittie [2016-05-03 12:25 +0100]:
> On Tue, 03 May 2016 at 11:23:40 +0200, Francois Gouget wrote:
> A mass-bug-filing or mass-patch-attaching to make libraries and development
> packages Multi-arch: same would be more in line with how things like this
> usually go.
There has already be
On 03.05.2016 13:25, Simon McVittie wrote:
On Tue, 03 May 2016 at 11:23:40 +0200, Francois Gouget wrote:
A large number of packages, particularly development packages, are not
multi-arch aware.
...
3.10 Multi-arch support
Packages must be multi-arch aware and architecture-specific
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 02:33:34PM +0200, Francois Gouget wrote:
> Those are not the same. They are about documenting various aspects of
> multi-arch, not about stating whether multi-arch *should* or *must* be
> implemented by packages.
well, before we can require something must be implemented,
+++ Holger Levsen [2016-05-03 11:33 +0200]:
> On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 11:23:40AM +0200, Francois Gouget wrote:
> > So I looked to see whether the Debian Policy was saying multi-arch is a
> > should, a must or something else.
> >
> > It turns out it does not say anything of value: multi-arch is me
Simon McVittie (2016-05-03):
> On Tue, 03 May 2016 at 11:23:40 +0200, Francois Gouget wrote:
> > A large number of packages, particularly development packages, are not
> > multi-arch aware.
> ...
> >3.10 Multi-arch support
> >
> >Packages must be multi-arch aware and architecture-specifi
On Tue, 3 May 2016, Holger Levsen wrote:
[...]
> there are already 7 or so bugs about multi-arch missing in various
> places in policy, I'd suggest you go to the BTS, search for those and
> help there.
Those are not the same. They are about documenting various aspects of
multi-arch, not about sta
On Tue, 03 May 2016 at 11:23:40 +0200, Francois Gouget wrote:
> A large number of packages, particularly development packages, are not
> multi-arch aware.
...
>3.10 Multi-arch support
>
>Packages must be multi-arch aware and architecture-specific
>development packages must be tagged
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 11:23:40AM +0200, Francois Gouget wrote:
> So I looked to see whether the Debian Policy was saying multi-arch is a
> should, a must or something else.
>
> It turns out it does not say anything of value: multi-arch is mentioned
> as being an exception to the FHS in section
A large number of packages, particularly development packages, are not
multi-arch aware. This raises the barrier of entry for performing 32 bit
development on a 64 bit system and actively hurts some projects like
Wine where it is very important to be able to compile both versions.
Looking into
10 matches
Mail list logo
