On 23 November 2010 00:00, Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> wrote: > BTW, it's ok to make this change manually now, but it will be overwritten > the next time someone runs the update-archs target in debian/rules. Which > is overdue, because there are a couple of architectures we're already > missing currently (powerpcspe, sparc64). I don't think we should be > prioritizing architectures in the package list that aren't even supported > by > dpkg yet, above those that are supported by dpkg. >
In that case, I guess the best solution is to ignore this patch and just wait until type-handling gets updated. > Which is where type-handling is getting its architecture list these days - > the output of 'dpkg-architecture -L'. > Which also means, I have to push dpkg maintainers again to resolve the situation and include the port name and propose a solution to the triplet issue. :-/ Otherwise, I run the risk of eventually having a port at 95+% which fulfills all archive inclusion criteria but is not supported by dpkg :) Regards Konstantinos
