2014-09-24 12:50 GMT+08:00, Ralf Mardorf <info.mardorf@rocketmail.com>:
On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 09:28 +0800, Fernando Gilberto Pereira da Silva wrote:
Since 'any' is the architecture of the package, why isn't there a folder called 'any' in the repo? I can see only 'i686' and 'x86_64' in repo 'core', 'extra' and 'community', and all of the 'any'-architecture packages are put into both 'i686' and 'x86_64' folders.
People might use 32-bit architecture or 64-bit architecture, there isn't an "any" architecture. The "any" only refers to the content of a package. The content isn't compiled to work on 32-bit or 64-bit architecture, e.g. a dash script, so it can be used on both architectures, ergo a package that can be used for "any" architecture, needs to be put to the 32-bit and to the 64-bit architecture repository. A repository for "any" doesn't make sense.
I think it makes sense in some case. Firstly, if I wish to create a personal repository manually, I don't need to copy an "any"-architecture package to both folders("i686" and "x86_64"), or link to both folders and then execute repo-add twice in both folders. What's more, some other unofficial architecture like "archlinuxarm" or "archlinuxppc" could also use those "any"-architecture package by just adding the "any" folder.(Though it may make a mess of it) In a word, keep only two folders("i686" and "x86_64") for the official repository and allow users to create their personal repositories with three folders("i686", "x86_64" and "any) would be a compromise solution.