2006/10/11, VMiklos <vmiklos@frugalware.org>:
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 09:48:21AM -0500, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
What is gained by having this suffix?
all my reasons are already mentioned here, so i just would like to sum up them:
1) protecting users from installing x86_64 packages on i686, or so
Heh? $ARCH suffix is just a part of filename. Only arch=(...) in .PKGINFO really should matter (and "protect"). Or I'm missing something?
2) being able to use a common cache for different architectures
Well, if you talk about /var/cache/pacman/pkg/ - then yes. But for what it's needed? Anyway if user uses x86_64 then all packages installed on his system are for x86_64, and those that are i686 only (binary games or flash plugin for example) simply don't have their x86_64 couterparts.
3) regarding the "it's not necessary, pacman can extract that info from .PKGINFO": the situation is the same with pkgver/pkgrel, too. why do we have them in the package name? i think because of 1) and 2)
No, it's not because 1) and 2). It's because it's needed for keeping multiple versions of package in /var/cache/pacman/pkg/. (i suppose pacman won't use cvs for that ;-) )
(oh and a 4) is about prodecting developers to mess up the packages, but the no1 is the user so this should not be a reason)
-- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)