Re: [pacman-dev] [PATCH] Add support for arch='all' to makepkg

On 10/31/07, Roman Kyrylych wrote:

2007/10/30, Aaron Griffin :

...

On 10/30/07, Roman Kyrylych wrote:

...

2007/10/30, Gabriel C :

...

...

I just had to pick one. :-) Another variant I like is 'any'. pacman -Qi outputs: Architecture: all - OK Architecture: any - OK, probably even better Architecture: noarch - huh? sounds bad ;-)

Architecture: generic ?

hm, didn't even thought about it. :) the problem is that then filenames wil contain -generic suffix which is too long IMO.

I like either 'generic' or 'any'. Dan?

Hm, ok, let it be one of them. I prefer 'any' though.

Don't want to bikeshed this, but let's put this in context: Current package names: pidgin-2.2.2-2-i686.pkg.tar.gz pidgin-2.2.2-2-x86_64.pkg.tar.gz pidgin-2.2.2-2-ppc.pkg.tar.gz ... Proposed generic architecture names: pidgin-2.2.2-2-all.pkg.tar.gz pidgin-2.2.2-2-generic.pkg.tar.gz pidgin-2.2.2-2-any.pkg.tar.gz pidgin-2.2.2-2-???.pkg.tar.gz My only concern here is that "any", "all", and "generic" are all a bit useless out of context. In the former package names, the context is immediately recognized. In the latter, do any of those really make sense? The problem is "anyarch" or "genericarch" or variants are way too long. Damn, another patch lost to politics. :) If I had to pick from the above, I'd go with "generic" I think because it carries the most context with it, just like an architecture name would. -Dan