On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 10:03:22PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote: > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > > On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 09:47:49PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote: > > > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > > > > I cannot currently actively participate in implementing proposed things, > > > > but I can give advice on sqlite, database and xml schemas if anyone > > > > wants to... > > > One of the things that would be nice for a replacement to do would be > > > to correctly install i386 packages on amd64 platforms (and similar > > > things). > > This has nothing to do with a new packaging system and can be done > > today if someone cares enough to work on it. > > Well, yeah - *anything* can be done if someone cares enough to work on > it - it's all just SMOP. You could definitely put enough smarts into > the package installer do this without actually changing the packaging > system. But if we're gonna change the packaging system anyway, why not > consider adding information that the package building software already > has so that the package installer software doesn't have to try and > figure it out?
Sure, we could pile on some more features onto a 6 year old design document that never got out of the design phase, or someone could just go and make the relatively minor changes to support i386 packages on amd64 now. I guess it's always more fun to build dream castles though :) > > Not gonna happen as a default, but you can change it on your systems > > if you like. > > Not very reliably. Best I can offer ;) Kris _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"