Aaron Griffin wrote:
On 9/25/07, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On 9/25/07, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On 9/25/07, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
Wait, now that I'm thinking, it might exist in the PKGINFO but pacman never explicitly checks it... Yeah, I don't know if we ever do a "pkg arch == running arch" check. The only time it'd matter is with the filename. Worth reviving? It was on the back-burner but it is something that has bugged me. If we do this, we could easily do some stuff for arch-generic packages around the same time.
http://code.toofishes.net/gitweb.cgi?p=pacman.git;a=commitdiff;h=a384a2feb2e...
Ok, yeah let's revive this, BUT, lets get at least a majority opinion on arch independent repos, before we attack this.
Can I get a simple +1/-1 for this, before Dan and I take it too far?
+1, but we must make sure we don't end up with separate *source* repos at any implementation level. e.g. [extra] should be said to contain a set of packages, and each package may be built for i686, x86_64, and/or our new "noarch" architecture and put in *binary* repos sorted by architecture. Otherwise we won't be able to maintain any coherence of the distribution across architectures, and they will grow into entirely separate beasts. - P "The world is a jungle in general, and the architecture game contributes many animals." -- paraphrased from RFC 826, the ARP specification