On 12/09/14 10:48, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> I could not find the answer anywhere. Why is arch:ppc64 not in the
> `any-powerpc` definition ? I would have guessed arch:ppc64 to be very
> close to arch:powerpc...
That would be like making any-i386 include (linux-)amd64 or (linux-)x32,
which we don't do either. any-i386 only includes (linux-)i386,
kfreebsd-i386, hurd-i386, and any future IA32 ports.
(A concrete example of something that would be broken by including ppc64
in any-powerpc: imagine a package that has "Architecture: any-i386
any-armel any-powerpc ..." because it doesn't care what kernel it is
compiled for, but it has an architectural assumption that ints, longs
and pointers are all the same size. ppc64 does not have that property.)
If we had a kfreebsd-powerpc or hurd-powerpc port, those would fit in
any-powerpc: the same processor as (linux-)powerpc, but a different
kernel/ABI. (linux-)ppc64 is part of any-ppc64 instead.
There might be situations where it would be useful to have a way to
spell "any member of the x86 family", "any member of the PowerPC
family", "any member of the ARM family" and "any member of the MIPS
family", but we currently don't.
S
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5412c87b.9050...@debian.org
