Re: Exclude some architectures from an architecture-independent package ?
- Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 14:30:22 +0200
- From: Adam Borowski <kilobyte@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Exclude some architectures from an architecture-independent package ?
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 01:14:10PM +0200, Raphaël Halimi wrote:
> Well, that's what I thought to do at the beginning, but the docs say
> that binary package duplication is a bad thing, and I didn't know if
> four copies of a 13 KB package (so a waste of 49 KB per mirror, which
> would seem negligible unless you're a purist) was an "acceptable"
> exception, hence my asking here for advice.
This part is utterly negligible. What would matter is bloating the Packages
file, but here they're the same, save for multi-arch machines (you get that
:i386 crap when listing rdepends/etc on amd64).
One other downside is having a "MA" warning on your QA screen -- unlike
lintian, I don't know of a way to silence that.
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Latin: meow 4 characters, 4 columns, 4 bytes
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Greek: μεου 4 characters, 4 columns, 8 bytes
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ Runes: ᛗᛖᛟᚹ 4 characters, 4 columns, 12 bytes
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Chinese: 喵 1 character, 2 columns, 3 bytes <-- best!