On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 06:45:15PM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote: > That's hard to answer without more insight into those packages than I > have. In general, it is desirable to mark shared library packages, debug > packages and development packages Multi-Arch: same, but such a marking > is not always correct and an incorrect marking causes much harm. > > I have 3 suggestions: > * Try to follow https://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/Implementation. > * Upload those packages to Debian unstable (after stretch) and follow > the "multiarch hinter" results on https://tracker.debian.org/<your > source package>. > * Upload those packages to Debian (e.g. experimental) and ask some > multiarchy person (e.g. me) for help.
The design of the rdma-core stuff was done with multi-arch in mind, I believe the following should be OK: Package: libibcm1 Package: libibcm1-dbg Package: libibcm-dev Package: libibumad3 Package: libibumad3-dbg Package: libibumad-dev Package: libibverbs1 Package: libibverbs1-dbg Package: libibverbs-dev Package: librdmacm1 Package: librdmacm1-dbg Package: librdmacm-dev We have no arch specific headers, provide no install scripts (aside from what dh produces) and do not use .pc or .la files. ibverbs-providers needs some fixing however.. Jason
