On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 11:58:59AM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Stuart Prescott <stuart <at> debian.org> writes: > > > Unfortunately, the people who understand multiarch well enough to write it > > up for policy haven't done so which leaves us with no normative > > documentation in policy for the the Multi-Arch field in Packages, no > > description of how the package manager should deal with multi-arch packages > > and their dependencies and no documentation of best practices for -dev > > packages etc. > > This can be read as "M-A in its current form is RC-buggy and must > not be released". With the obvious follow-ups (revert M-A perl/python > in sid, as Guillem said).
Please note that perl in sid is not and has never been multi-arch enabled. I've been holding this back mostly because of Guillem's concerns, which haven't been addressed yet AFAIK. A full multiarch coinstallable perl stack doesn't seem to be attainable and I haven't been able to decide where to draw the line. OTOH, python has had the multi-arch annotations for quite a while and I suppose that's working well enough? If somebody thinks the spec and dpkg and all are working well enough and would like to champion multi-arch for perl, I'd be happy to get help. It's been very hard for me to find the time / tuits for this stuff. (I see ruby2.0 in sid is now M-A:foreign, which seems wrong to me as it can also load DSOs, and those may end up with a different architecture from ruby itself. I've filed #745360 about this.) -- Niko Tyni nt...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140420214705.GA13018@estella.local.invalid