On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 05:26:00PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > So it would seem to me the arch-qualifying logic in apt is not right, > it really only ever needs to arch-qualify if: > > * dpkg supports --assert-multi-arch > AND > * the package is Multi-Arch:same > > Because M-A:same packages are guaranteed to always have a valid > architecture, something that cannot be expected from non-M-A:same > packages due to legacy reasons.
Shouldn't we instead change APT to not assume the native architecture for such packages? You later wrote that there are differences to native packages when handling them, what are they? If there are differences in dependency resolution, APT might need to be teached about this. And I'm sure that much code in APT or python-apt projects actually relies on the architecture being available always, I surely did not consider packages without an architecture ever (too old stuff?). -- Julian Andres Klode - Debian Developer, Ubuntu Member See http://wiki.debian.org/JulianAndresKlode and http://jak-linux.org/. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
