Hi Julian,
Thanks for taking a look at this.
> On 8 Jan 2017, at 21:42, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 01:33:08AM +, James Clarke wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 12:05:18AM +0100, David Kalnischkies wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 01:39:45PM +, Colin Watson w
On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 01:33:08AM +, James Clarke wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 12:05:18AM +0100, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 01:39:45PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:31:52PM +0100, Balint Reczey wrote:
> > > > On 06/04/2014 03:41 AM,
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 12:05:18AM +0100, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 01:39:45PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:31:52PM +0100, Balint Reczey wrote:
> > > On 06/04/2014 03:41 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > > > * Other programs could “easily” use dpkg
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 01:39:45PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:31:52PM +0100, Balint Reczey wrote:
> > On 06/04/2014 03:41 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > > * Other programs could “easily” use dpkg-architecture to check for
> > >identity or a match. (This poses problem
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 03:17:18PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 01:39:45PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > I think this is somewhat unfortunate, but it is the reality right now.
> > Perhaps a good thing for somebody to work on would be reimplementing
> > dpkg-architecture i
2016-01-20 15:12 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey :
> Hi,
>
> 2016-01-20 14:39 GMT+01:00 Colin Watson :
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:31:52PM +0100, Balint Reczey wrote:
>>> On 06/04/2014 03:41 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
>>> > * Other programs could “easily” use dpkg-architecture to check for
>>> >identi
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 01:39:45PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:31:52PM +0100, Balint Reczey wrote:
> > On 06/04/2014 03:41 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > > * Other programs could “easily” use dpkg-architecture to check for
> > >identity or a match. (This poses problem
Hi,
2016-01-20 14:39 GMT+01:00 Colin Watson :
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:31:52PM +0100, Balint Reczey wrote:
>> On 06/04/2014 03:41 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
>> > * Other programs could “easily” use dpkg-architecture to check for
>> >identity or a match. (This poses problems for programs tha
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:31:52PM +0100, Balint Reczey wrote:
> On 06/04/2014 03:41 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > * Other programs could “easily” use dpkg-architecture to check for
> >identity or a match. (This poses problems for programs that do not
>
> I think making apt call dpkg-architect
Hi,
On 06/04/2014 03:41 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sun, 2014-05-25 at 22:04:48 +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
>> * Johannes Schauer [140522 13:30]:
>>> Debian policy 11.1.1 [1] and the associated footnote [2] allow
>>> architecture wildcards of the form os-any and any-cpu. Apt seems t
* Guillem Jover [140604 03:42]:
> * Other programs could “easily” use dpkg-architecture to check for
>identity or a match. (This poses problems for programs that do not
>want to either require dpkg around or to fork its tables.)
That assumes that dpkg knows the arechitecture already on t
Hi!
On Sun, 2014-05-25 at 22:04:48 +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Johannes Schauer [140522 13:30]:
> > Debian policy 11.1.1 [1] and the associated footnote [2] allow
> > architecture wildcards of the form os-any and any-cpu. Apt seems to
> > equal "cpu" with "debian architecture" which is not
* Russ Allbery [140525 22:58]:
> > and having such important fields a meaning that you cannot calculate
> > without knowing what architectures the system finally using the package
> > uses makes it unhandable).
>
> I'm not completely sure what you mean by this, but if you mean that you
> can't kno
"Bernhard R. Link" writes:
> Urgh. Really? This is far too complicated for most programs to implement
> properly. I'd suggest to rather fix dpkg (and also fix policy.
Policy should obviously track dpkg, which is currently canonical for how
wildcards work since it contains the primary implementat
* Johannes Schauer [140522 13:30]:
> Debian policy 11.1.1 [1] and the associated footnote [2] allow
> architecture wildcards of the form os-any and any-cpu. Apt seems to
> equal "cpu" with "debian architecture" which is not correct. Here is an
> example of correct matching:
>
> dpkg-architecture
15 matches
Mail list logo
