I think a noarch like list would make sence. This so when arch is not i?86 it will look for it in packages-noarch.list and the $ARCH/packages.list. Its also so we don't have to rename the noarch packages (ex. cookutils-2.0-noarch.tazpkg) and just a have a option only out put a list. Thi s should keep it simple for me to add to my code later on.
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Christophe Lincoln <[email protected]>wrote: > > > I still don't like the idea of multiarch just cause its going to be > > not easy to make my slitaz-tank isos anymore. So i will not be able > > support other anyways since slitaz-tank was meant for x86 only so we > > only have to have 1 type of arch. Its why i used slitaz in first > > place. It was simple. With multiarch it can't be done so simply. I > > know this cause i did try looking at making a source dvd like > > slitaz-tank on archlinux back in 2010. > > The way I done it does not change anything to Tank and the default > x86/i486 arch. Cooker is in same path, we use main wok, cook works the > same way until ARCH is set to something else than i486. I know it can > look complicated and a huge change but you will see it's not and we will > make it as simple as possible. Also, tazpkg will not change, cook > behavor will only change if cross-compiling witch is not the case for > tank-dvd > > That said it is huge changes and we will move to multiarch step by > step and first with spk (tazpkg may never handle multiarch by the way). > The goal actually is just boot an ARM machine with ~20 packages (linux, > glibc-base, busybox, zlib, base-files and boot-scripts is the minimal). > > On the packages side, we can keep things as it. And have other arch > packages in packages/$ARCH on mirror. Having a dir on mirror will not > alter tazpkg or tank-dvd since it use list in packages/* > > - Christophe > > -- > SliTaz GNU/Linux Mailing list - http://www.slitaz.org/ > >
