Helmut Grohne wrote: > So you made me thinking, can we somehow implement this with our > current spec? The most important requirements seem to be: > > * libsystemd-shared.so and /sbin/systemd need to reside in the same > binary package. > * It shall be possible to depend on libsystemd-shared.so for a > particular architecture. > * A dependency on "systemd" should request a native systemd. > > Now let's do something stupid. Rename systemd to systemd-core (taking > all files with it, please refrain from discussing the name unless you > seriously consider doing this). Mark it Multi-Arch: allowed. Add a new, > empty binary package systemd. It is Multi-Arch: foreign and depends on > systemd-core:any. This approach would technically satisfy all three > requirements, but it feels a little crazy to me.
This seems like a rather reasonable approach, actually. It's a little unusual, but it has all the advantages of making systemd multi-arch aware while not creating the trap of making a `systemd` dependency do the wrong thing, because `systemd` has the right multi-arch dependency on `systemd-core:any`. The handful of packages that really do need a same-arch dependency on systemd (those that are part of systemd itself and need libsystemd-shared) could depend on `systemd-core` directly, and everything else can continue depending on systemd with no transition required. And there's only one trip through NEW, once.
