Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-...@web.de> writes: > So far I have only seen one reason stated clearly: Might hinder > transition to multiarch. I think I have shown how I intend to handle > that transition in ia32-libs-tools whenever and however Debian will do > it. So far nobody has pointed out flaws in that plan.
Personally, the main thing that makes me uncomfortable with the ia32-libs-tools approach from a design perspective is that it's manipulating data that previously in Debian we've assumed is invarient. In this thread some of the ideas discussed have involved rewriting the Packages file so that uses via a different tool see different package metadata, and creating Debian packages via a somewhat-official tool from the main archive that do not appear in any of our package tracking systems but which users may perceive as being part of Debian. Even apart from the question of what specific problems people can anticipate in advance and what solutions we can find for those problems, both of those strike me as bad architectural approaches because they break assumptions that users and software make about the data consistency of Debian as a whole. They're the kind of decisions that have a tendency to cause unexpected and unanticipated problems in the future. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
