Hi Didier,
I don't know how to correctly explain it in terms of Debian packaging
rules, but conceptually, yes, ipp-usb:i386 should be satisfied by
ipp-usb:amd64 and visa versa.
I'll Cc: this conversation to Zdenek, because the same idea may be
applied to Fedora packaging too.
And probably, the same is true for the ARM32/ARM64 combination.
On 2/19/21 8:39 PM, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
Hello Alexander,
As ipp-usb author; do you have an opinion/advice about this?
Many thanks in advance, cheers,
OdyX
Le samedi, 16 janvier 2021, 12.19:15 h CET Simon McVittie a écrit :
Package: ipp-usb
Version: 0.9.16-1
Severity: minor
A recent update to wine32:i386 on my amd64 system pulled in libsane1:i386,
which Recommends ipp-usb. Because ipp-usb is Multi-Arch: no, apt
interprets this as wanting to install ipp-usb:i386, which conflicts
with ipp-usb:amd64.
ipp-usb seems to be a daemon (systemd service) that is contacted via
IPC, conceptually similar to avahi-daemon, dbus-daemon or cups - which
hopefully means that it doesn't matter which architecture's ipp-usb
you have, because libsane1:amd64, libsane1:i386 and libsane1:mipsel
all speak the same architecture-independent IPC protocol to communicate
with ipp-usb?
If that's the case, then ipp-usb should be marked Multi-Arch: foreign,
which means that libsane1:i386 Recommends: ipp-usb would be satisfied
by ipp-usb:amd64.
--
Wishes, Alexander Pevzner (p...@apevzner.com)
