On 9/26/07, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com> wrote:
2007/9/26, Travis Willard <travis@archlinux.org>:
On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 14:49:13 -0500 "Aaron Griffin" <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> 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 for architecture independence
+1.
Note that we don't need any noarch repo or something like this! We should just do this: 1) modify {core,extra,community}pkg to tag CVS files for noarch packages as CURRENT and CURRENT64 at the same time 2) add noarch packages to i686 and x86_64 .db.tar.gz files at the same time (modify all needed scripts) 3) modify makepkg to understand arch=('any') (or 'all', feel free to name it) and make -any.pkg.tar.gz files 4) modify our web backend (we need to do this anyway because of x86_64 support) No changes to pacman needed.
This is a good point, I didn't think about it. Pacman 3.0 lists actual filenames in the DBs (so a package could actually be named "lol.wtf" if you wanted it to). If we simply add special handling in the scripts (makepkg, db scripts, etc) for -any/-all packages, we can solve this with little changes. Dan and I will look into this - could someone add a ticket to flyspray as a reminder - assign it to Dan and myself. Thanks. --Aaron