On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 08:04:35PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: > Control: severity -1 normal > > > On Sun, 23 Sep 2012 19:43:57 +0200 Francesco Poli wrote: > > > On Sun, 23 Sep 2012 11:54:52 +0200 Yann Dirson wrote: > [...] > > > Severity: important > [...] > > (unless it fixes a release critical bug, but this one > > is definitely not RC). > > By the way, I think the severity of your report is a bit inflated. > This bug does not have "a major effect on the usability of" > apt-listbugs.
Well, given that multi-arch is a release goal for wheezy, we're entering a blurry domain here :) I guess a "level 0" support, like using the "arch qualified" package name (or whatever the exact term is - that is, libfoo:i386 instead of just libfoo, probably an info that can be queried from dpkg with little change), could be something not too intrusive to add, and which would even have the potential to be accepted into wheezy as participating to the release goal ? > It could even be considered wishlist, since, so far, supporting > multiarch is something that apt-listbugs has never attempted to do. > Hence, this looks like a request for a new feature. > > But it's true that, when multiarch is enabled on a box, apt-listbugs > works in a less useful manner. That's right, one can still find out the info by other means, it's still not very comfortable, and maybe not something everyone will want to do. Remember the situation which led me to seeing this problem: as it is, apt-listbugs is likely to loose at least some of its usefulness on all amd64 machines on which wine gets installed, since the latter now requires a multiarch setup. HTH, -- Yann -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
