10 Oct
2006
10 Oct
'06
4:48 p.m.
So I actually expected someone to start this, as I was curious. I know frugalware uses the architecture suffix on packages, and Xentac thinks this is a good idea. I'd like to hear reasons. I don't really feel that "RPM and DEB do it" is a good enough reason. I mean, if that reason was good enough, we'd be using RPM/DEB in place of pacman packages. The way I see it, I don't think pacman needs to know the architecture it's running on. Installing "pkg-foo" should be no different on i686 or PPC. Therefore, I think that adding the architecture suffix is extra information that's not really needed. What is gained by having this suffix?