Directory Organization for Sub-Architectures?

[Kaz Sasayama <Kaz.Sasayama@hypercore.co.jp>]

What do you think about directory organization for
sub-architectures?

There is a work in progress to make Debian packages for a
non-AT i386 architecture in Japan.  While the architecture
requires special kernel and system-specific commands, users
are able to use the most of i386 binaries with no changes.

I expect the Debian GNU/Linux will support the architecture
in the future, but there may be a problem when it becomes
true.  I don't think the current directory organization can
handle such sub-architectures well.

I think the solution will be either:

a) Name the architecture a new name other than i386 and make
a lot of symlinks in a new binary package directory, or

b) Add the notion of sub-architecture to the packaging
system and share a directory between sub-architectures.

What do you think?

-- 
Kaz Sasayama <Kaz.Sasayama@hypercore.co.jp>
Hypercore Software Design, Ltd. <URL:http://www.hypercore.co.jp/>


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .