Backport aarch64 support to stable releases for infratructure/buildd use
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
dpkg (Ubuntu) |
Invalid
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
Precise |
Fix Released
|
Undecided
|
Adam Conrad |
Bug Description
[Impact]
This allows various bits of archive and package building infrastructure on precise to recognise arm64 as a valid arch, needed for Soyuz, but also some third-party archive infrastructure setups.
[Test Case]
Test that "dpkg-architecture -aarm64" outputs the same on precise-proposed as it does on raring.
[Regression Potential]
Minimal regression potential.
[Original Report]
The lucid-cat dpkg already knows about arm64/aarch64 (I backported it a while ago for use on infrastructure machines), however precise missed out on this, and instead of building special internal versions of tools with simple backports like this, it makes much more sense to SRU them to the archive proper, so others doing the same things we are (ie: building and hosting archives on LTS releases) can also benefit from these backports.
Quantal's dpkg already supports arm64, and no one except Canonical (who is already dealt with via the above lucid-cat backport) should really care about armd64-on-lucid, so this backport will only be done to precise.
Related branches
Changed in dpkg (Ubuntu): | |
status: | New → Invalid |
Changed in dpkg (Ubuntu Precise): | |
assignee: | nobody → Adam Conrad (adconrad) |
description: | updated |
Changed in dpkg (Ubuntu Precise): | |
status: | New → In Progress |
Hello Adam, or anyone else affected,
Accepted dpkg into precise-proposed. The package will build now and be available at http:// launchpad. net/ubuntu/ +source/ dpkg/1. 16.1.2ubuntu7. 1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See https:/ /wiki.ubuntu. com/Testing/ EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.
If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug, mentioning the version of the package you tested, and change the tag from verification-needed to verification-done. If it does not fix the bug for you, please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification- failed. In either case, details of your testing will help us make a better decision.
Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https:/ /wiki.ubuntu. com/QATeam/ PerformingSRUVe rification . Thank you in advance!