[pacman-dev] Problems with frugalware splitname changes

Roman Kyrylych roman.kyrylych at gmail.com
Sun Oct 8 14:59:23 EDT 2006


Can non-pacman-dev-man enter this discusstion?

VMiksos said:
> okay, but then we should hardcore the list of possible arches. or how
> could we determine of the last item is an arch or a pkgrel?

I don't see a problem here. There're not much archs to deal with,
curently only i686 and x86_64. Other distros may implement ppc and
maybe some more, but anyway it's not too much to hardcode them.

2006/10/8, Jason Chu <jason at archlinux.org>:
> On Sun, 8 Oct 2006 11:14:32 +0200
> VMiklos <vmiklos at frugalware.org> wrote:
> > 2) all the other package managers (rpm/deb/slack) includes the
> > architecture in the filename
> I've been arguing for the architecture in the filename for a long
> time... some arch devs are really against the idea and I have no idea
> why...  Usually the best argument they have is that it breaks backwards
> compatibility and packages in repos should be stored in their
> architecture's directories.  Both of which, I don't buy.
> I once had an idea to not depend on the filename at all.  Instead to
> get the package's info from the .PKGINFO.  Then the filename becomes
> irrelevant...

What -i686/-x86_64 will give to ordinary user? Just more chars in
every pacman output!
If user choose the x86_64 repo then almost all packages will be x86_64
anyway ( some can be for i686 only if there are no correspondent
x86_64 versions).

Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)

More information about the pacman-dev mailing list