On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Jonas Meyer <qui...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Bill Allombert > <bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr> wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 08:40:32AM -0400, Scott Howard wrote: >>> On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Bill Allombert >>> <bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr> wrote: >>> > So you do not need libjpeg62-dev to be multi-arch, only libjpeg62 ? >>> >>> >>> Yes, we just need libjpeg62:i386 and libjpeg62:amd64 to be >>> coinstallable (multiarch paths), thank you. >> >> I made the package but then realised I cannot really test it since no package >> is using libjpeg62 anymore. >> So here it is: >> <http://people.debian.org/~ballombe/jpeg> >> Please test it. >> >> Cheers, >> Bill. > > Thanks! > > I'm really glad eagle will stay in the archive for some more time. > But isn't the i386 package the important one? > > Installing the package worked fine and eagle didn't break, though I > don't understand where the :i386 package came from.
@Jonas: for eagle, the :i386 package is what matters - but in Debian, as a system, we strive for the whole archive to play well with each other for everyone. We're trying to fix the case (as in the original reporter) where someone originally had the 64 bit library installed which prevented them from installing eagle. To fix it, we have to update both the 64 and i386 version of the package. Jonas, could you test this (I don't have an AMD64 system available)? You can email me off list if you'd like detailed instructions on how to build/test this. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
