Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.samoylyk.net!gothmog.csi.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Matthias Klose Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: Multi-Arch: same and WHEEL files Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2025 22:10:02 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: Scott Talbert , Soren Stoutner X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Wed Jan 8 21:03:06 2025 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.596 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.4, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate: -2.7 X-Greylist: delayed 889 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at bendel; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 21:02:52 UTC Old-X-Envelope-From: doko@debian.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22766 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/5b561eb6-e8f8-452e-b523-11f617f65641@debian.org Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 33 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: Debian Python X-Original-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 21:47:53 +0100 X-Original-Message-ID: <5b561eb6-e8f8-452e-b523-11f617f65641@debian.org> X-Original-References: <2052369.kXSN5OTJKJ@soren-desktop> <3a49016-ed33-4a10-de25-59ccda35631a@techie.net> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:16672 On 08.01.25 21:36, Scott Talbert wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jan 2025, Soren Stoutner wrote: > >> Python3-hid was marked `Multi-Arch: same` by a previous maintainer. >> Recently, >> tracker.debian.org warned that there is an issue because the WHEEL >> file is >> different in each package. >> >> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python-hidapi >> >> The differences are in the `tag` field in the WHEEL file.  For >> example, amd64 >> has: >> >> Tag: cp312-cp312-linux_x86_64 >> >> While arm64 has: >> >> Tag: cp312-cp312-linux_aarch64 >> >> What is the recommended way to deal with this?\ >> >> 1.  Should the package not be marked `Multi-Arch: same`? >> >> 2.  Should I prevent the binary package from shipping the WHEEL file? >> >> 3.  Is there some other recommendation? > > It seems like this package probably should just not be marked Multi- > Arch: same.  The WHEEL file is likely important metadata. but why would we ship wheel files in the first place?