Steve Langasek writes:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 06:52:34PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Look at perl for example:
>
>> Package: perl-base
>> Provides: perlapi-5.10.0
>
>> I suggest to also provide perlabi-$(DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE) or
>> perlabi-5.10.0-$(DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE). Perl extensions th
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 06:52:34PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Patches implementing what? I don't see any public discussion of an agreed
> > design for the package manager.
> Patches for dpkg to accept the Multi-Arch field as a tristate of Yes,
> No or missing and for packages to set t
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Le mardi 30 juin 2009 à 18:52 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
>> Please stop confusing ia32-apt-get with multiarch. It clearly is a
>> kludge to keep 32bit binaries working till there is multiarch. It is
>> not ment as a replacement.
>
> No, it is not a kludge.
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 06:56:11PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Mark Brown writes:
> > Then bring that up and try to move the discussion forward (as now seems
> > to be happening). The approach that's currently being pused seems like
> > a blind alley.
> People really do seem to confuse
Le mardi 30 juin 2009 à 18:52 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
> Please stop confusing ia32-apt-get with multiarch. It clearly is a
> kludge to keep 32bit binaries working till there is multiarch. It is
> not ment as a replacement.
No, it is not a kludge. It is a horrible pile of trash.
ia32
Mark Brown writes:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 09:31:24PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Mark Brown writes:
>
>> > There seems to be at least some crossover between the people who were
>> > looking at multiarch and the people doing this stuff.
>
>> But not the people blocking the inclusion
Steve Langasek writes:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 09:50:01PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Raphael Hertzog writes:
>
>> > There is work going on recently. Steve Langasek drafted a plan that he
>> > wants to bring forward in Ubuntu Karmic Koala and it has been reviewed by
>> > Guillem Jove
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 09:31:24PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Mark Brown writes:
> > There seems to be at least some crossover between the people who were
> > looking at multiarch and the people doing this stuff.
> But not the people blocking the inclusion of patches for multiarch
> al
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 09:02:05PM +0100, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> I've also CC'd Hector and Steve who are listed as owners on that
> document because whatever we do to get multiarch working (and I have no
> strong views on the right way to do it) we should definitely not do it
> differently to Ubu
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
>> I would largely prefer if ia32-* in its actual shape would be released in
>> experimental (where, with this level of touching the base of Debian
>> repositories handling, it should sit) and version 2.7 uploaded back in
>> Sid...
>
> C
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 05:43:16AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> See the various links on http://wiki.debian.org/multiarch for the work
> on multiarch going back to 2004.
I reviewed that page prior to the UDS session.
It was all but useless (and I had to edit the page to update several lin
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 09:50:01PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog writes:
> > There is work going on recently. Steve Langasek drafted a plan that he
> > wants to bring forward in Ubuntu Karmic Koala and it has been reviewed by
> > Guillem Jover, the dpkg maintainer. Guillem
Yannick writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>> There where 3 options:
>>
>> 1) ia32-libs + ia32-libs-gtk (+ ia32-libs-kde + ia32-libs-qt)
>> ftp-master asked us to clean that up basically and
>> "it would not pass NEW if it where uploaded now"
>>
>> 2) ia32-lib* packages in the same schema
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Too bad they did that without involving the people already working on
>> multiarch via the alioth project.
>>
>> They messed up some finer details, broke the existing patches, made
>> the whole thing need a full releas
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Le lundi 29 juin 2009 à 21:30 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
>> Josselin Mouette writes:
>> > No, it is not going to be. The whole design needs work before it can be.
>>
>> There is a better design. It is called multiarch. But some people are
>> blocking that
Le lundi 29 juin 2009 à 23:06 +0200, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> I would also not merge patches without knowing if the full plan is
> credible.
This is the precise point that seems to be missing.
Goswin, if you have a prototype multiarch system based on unstable that
mostly works, with patches fo
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Too bad they did that without involving the people already working on
> multiarch via the alioth project.
>
> They messed up some finer details, broke the existing patches, made
> the whole thing need a full release cycle for a transition due to
>
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 05:30:35PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Mehdi Dogguy writes:
> Because there where no ideas brought forward to discuss.
> There where 3 options:
> 1) ia32-libs + ia32-libs-gtk (+ ia32-libs-kde + ia32-libs-qt)
>ftp-master asked us to clean that up basically an
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> There where 3 options:
>
> 1) ia32-libs + ia32-libs-gtk (+ ia32-libs-kde + ia32-libs-qt)
> ftp-master asked us to clean that up basically and
> "it would not pass NEW if it where uploaded now"
>
> 2) ia32-lib* packages in the same schema as ia32-libs
> vetoed by ftp
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Better add the pinings from /usr/share/doc/ia32-apt-get/NEWS.Debian.gz
> as well.
Goswin, you should put a "debconf warning" to point the apt pining solution
to the user.
Yannick
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject o
On Mon Jun 29 21:50, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > There is work going on recently. Steve Langasek drafted a plan that he
> > wants to bring forward in Ubuntu Karmic Koala and it has been reviewed by
> > Guillem Jover, the dpkg maintainer. Guillem also has plans to make it a
> > reality inside De
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Norbert Preining wrote:
>> On Mo, 29 Jun 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
>> > > Figure out an acceptable option 4.
>> >
>> > Multiarch was mentioned in the original thread.
>>
>> Not that I was happy with the original situation (filing myself a bug),
>> bu
Le lundi 29 juin 2009 à 21:30 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
> Josselin Mouette writes:
> > No, it is not going to be. The whole design needs work before it can be.
>
> There is a better design. It is called multiarch. But some people are
> blocking that.
Identify the blockers. Work with
Mark Brown writes:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 06:12:20PM +0200, Norbert Preining wrote:
>> On Mo, 29 Jun 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>> > Multiarch was mentioned in the original thread.
>
>> Not that I was happy with the original situation (filing myself a bug),
>> but all that "multiarch" blabla an
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Le lundi 29 juin 2009 à 17:30 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
>> > consider it as a âÂÂreleasableâ solution?
>>
>> Going to be.
>
> No, it is not going to be. The whole design needs work before it can be.
There is a better design. It is called multiarc
On Mon Jun 29 20:18, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Norbert Preining wrote:
> > On Mo, 29 Jun 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > > Figure out an acceptable option 4.
> > >
> > > Multiarch was mentioned in the original thread.
> >
> > Not that I was happy with the original situation (fil
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mo, 29 Jun 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > Figure out an acceptable option 4.
> >
> > Multiarch was mentioned in the original thread.
>
> Not that I was happy with the original situation (filing myself a bug),
> but all that "multiarch" blabla and n
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 06:12:20PM +0200, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mo, 29 Jun 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Multiarch was mentioned in the original thread.
> Not that I was happy with the original situation (filing myself a bug),
> but all that "multiarch" blabla and nothing is going forward in
On Mo, 29 Jun 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Figure out an acceptable option 4.
>
> Multiarch was mentioned in the original thread.
Not that I was happy with the original situation (filing myself a bug),
but all that "multiarch" blabla and nothing is going forward in this
direction, so this is not a
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 05:59:32PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 17:30:35 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > So strike option 1 and 2 and what are you left with?
> Figure out an acceptable option 4.
Multiarch was mentioned in the original thread.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 17:30:35 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> There where 3 options:
>
> 1) ia32-libs + ia32-libs-gtk (+ ia32-libs-kde + ia32-libs-qt)
>ftp-master asked us to clean that up basically and
>"it would not pass NEW if it where uploaded now"
>
> 2) ia32-lib* packages i
Lionel Elie Mamane writes:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 03:57:28PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Lionel Elie Mamane writes:
>
>>> While we are on the subject of ia32-apt-get, I'm not sure _what_
>>> happened, but after the upgrade of ia32-apt-get 14 to 18, suddenly
>>> aptitude had about 20
Le lundi 29 juin 2009 à 17:30 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
> > consider it as a âreleasableâ solution?
>
> Going to be.
No, it is not going to be. The whole design needs work before it can be.
> > How would aptitude users do now?
>
> apt-get update; aptitude
And how would synaptic
Mehdi Dogguy writes:
> Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> as the topic says, I noticed the new ia32-libs package depends on
>> ia32-apt-get.
>>
>
> I searched the list archive and found only one thread[1] related to
> ia32-apt-get. Correct me if I'm wrong but it was clear for me, when
> read
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as the topic says, I noticed the new ia32-libs package depends on
> ia32-apt-get.
>
I searched the list archive and found only one thread[1] related to
ia32-apt-get. Correct me if I'm wrong but it was clear for me, when
reading comments, that the solution was n
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 03:57:28PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Lionel Elie Mamane writes:
>> While we are on the subject of ia32-apt-get, I'm not sure _what_
>> happened, but after the upgrade of ia32-apt-get 14 to 18, suddenly
>> aptitude had about 200 package in "upgradable" state that
Josselin Mouette (29/06/2009):
> All existing frontends use the same dependency resolution engine,
> except for aptitude. Installing a package with synaptic, apt-get,
> adept or gnome-app-install should give the same result.
cupt! cupt! cupt!
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital sign
Lionel Elie Mamane writes:
> While we are on the subject of ia32-apt-get, I'm not sure _what_
> happened, but after the upgrade of ia32-apt-get 14 to 18, suddenly
> aptitude had about 200 package in "upgradable" state that were not
> upgradable before.
ia32-apt-get encodes its own version into t
Le lundi 29 juin 2009 à 15:33 +0200, Hans-J. Ullrich a écrit :
> Hmm, o.k., apt-get is working for me, this is o.k., but I ask myself now:
> What
> is the recommended tool in future? Especially, as the handling of
> dependencies
> and packages in apt-get, aptitude and synaptic are in each diffe
> Aptitude’s (well-known) brokenness is irrelevant. There are many other
> APT frontents, like synaptic, which don’t have broken dependency
> management, and which will fail just as well with ia32-apt-get.
>
> I wonder how you could even think once that diverting apt-get was a good
> idea. If you
While we are on the subject of ia32-apt-get, I'm not sure _what_
happened, but after the upgrade of ia32-apt-get 14 to 18, suddenly
aptitude had about 200 package in "upgradable" state that were not
upgradable before.
The issue is I don't remember for sure what /etc/apt/sources.list
looked like be
Le lundi 29 juin 2009 à 15:14 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
> I never use aptitude and after doing a test upgrade of an older sid to
> current with aptitude I'm verry much affirmed on that. The last ~50
> packages I upgraded with "apt-get upgrade" again because the aptitude
> interface just
Didier Raboud writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
>>> Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
> Norbert Preining wrote:
>> - calling /usr/share/ia32-apt-get/convert-all-sources.list
>
> Which horribly breaks with anything a
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
>> Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>> Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
Norbert Preining wrote:
> - calling /usr/share/ia32-apt-get/convert-all-sources.list
Which horribly breaks with anything a little custom (proxies, custom
>
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>> Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
>>> Norbert Preining wrote:
- calling /usr/share/ia32-apt-get/convert-all-sources.list
>>>
>>> Which horribly breaks with anything a little custom (proxies, custom
>>> repositories, ...) and fills y
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
>> Norbert Preining wrote:
>>> - calling /usr/share/ia32-apt-get/convert-all-sources.list
>>
>> Which horribly breaks with anything a little custom (proxies, custom
>> repositories, ...) and fills your /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ with ia32-a
Le lundi 29 juin 2009 à 11:54 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
> The reasons for ia32-apt-get are this:
[snip]
There are good reasons for ia32-apt-get to exist. But the implementation
is so horribly wrong that it gives me headaches only thinking about it.
It is nothing but a giant hack on whi
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
> Hi,
>
> Norbert Preining wrote:
>> On Mo, 29 Jun 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>>> This package was already enough of a hack, but at least it worked
>>> without fiddling in horrible ways with the packaging system.
>>>
>>> How can we have a working wine or nsplugin
On Mo, 29 Jun 2009, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> OdyX, who points to multiarch and suggests it is maybe time to go the real
> route instead…
Not that i am happy with the current status, but at least I managed to
get some things working again.
Best wishes
Norbert
--
Hi,
Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mo, 29 Jun 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> This package was already enough of a hack, but at least it worked
>> without fiddling in horrible ways with the packaging system.
>>
>> How can we have a working wine or nspluginwrapper now?
>
> Not that I know about n
On Mo, 29 Jun 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> This package was already enough of a hack, but at least it worked
> without fiddling in horrible ways with the packaging system.
>
> How can we have a working wine or nspluginwrapper now?
Not that I know about nspluginwrapper, but I got my skype work
51 matches
Mail list logo
