Bug#539038: dpkg: please add support for ad-hoc architecture definitions

2009-12-09 Thread Simon Richter
Hi, On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 05:23:46PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: As discussed during DebConf, I agree with the goal but I'm not entirely happy with the proposed use of “x-”, as the dash breaks current assumptions of what's what depending on the position relative to it. What I've been

Bug#539038: dpkg: please add support for ad-hoc architecture definitions

2009-10-25 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Sat, 2009-08-15 at 19:36:07 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 19:06:55 +0200, Simon Richter wrote: Package: dpkg Version: 1.14.25 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch this patch adds an exception to dpkg-architecture that allows architecture names that start with

Bug#539038: dpkg: please add support for ad-hoc architecture definitions

2009-08-15 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 19:06:55 +0200, Simon Richter wrote: Package: dpkg Version: 1.14.25 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch this patch adds an exception to dpkg-architecture that allows architecture names that start with x- as long as a GNU architecture name is also specified. This is

Bug#539038: dpkg: please add support for ad-hoc architecture definitions

2009-07-28 Thread Simon Richter
Package: dpkg Version: 1.14.25 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch Hi, this patch adds an exception to dpkg-architecture that allows architecture names that start with x- as long as a GNU architecture name is also specified. This is incredibly useful if one wants to define local architectures for