On Sunday 15 November 2015 11:27:09 Andreas Beckmann wrote: > > I haven't rebooted yet so I don't know if it will cause problems, but it > > does seem odd that on my amd64 a package from armhf is installed as > > dependency instead of the one from my 'native' architecture. > > That's weird, but it should be harmless,
I now have rebooted and the system/X still works so it looks like you're right. But as I don't use the functionality of update-glx (afaik) I don't know whether it still functions or not. > otherwise these packages wouldn't be multiarch:foreign > ... > I cannot reproduce this by installing glx-alternative-nvidia in a > minimal sid amd64+armhf schroot. Maybe a bug in apt/aptitude/... you may > want to reassign it there. $ aptitude search '?narrow(~i,?multiarch(foreign))' | wc -l 358 According to the above query I have 358 package installed which are multiarch:foreign, but this is the first time I've seen the reported behavior and I've had this multi-arch configuration for (quite) a while now. The output of my nvidia/glx-alternative package from the above query (without the "wc -l" part), notice the odd one out: i A glx-alternative-mesa - allows the selection of MESA as GLX provider i A glx-alternative-nvidia - allows the selection of NVIDIA as GLX provider i A glx-diversions - prepare for using accelerated GLX implementations from GPU vendors i A nvidia-alternative - allows the selection of NVIDIA as GLX provider i A nvidia-installer-cleanup - cleanup after driver installation with the nvidia-installer i A nvidia-kernel-dkms - NVIDIA binary kernel module DKMS source i A nvidia-kernel-support - NVIDIA binary kernel module support files i A nvidia-support - NVIDIA binary graphics driver support files i A update-glx:armhf - utility for switching the GLX implementation update-glx is indeed the only one in the whole list with ":armhf" appended to its package name. Before reassigning it to apt/aptitude I'd prefer to have found another package which exhibits the reported behavior. Do you have any suggestions on how to find a (likely) candidate? > That's reproducible (I manually installed update-glx:armhf afterwards), > can you reportbug reportbug ? I've added my findings to bug #690537
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
