Mono vs. Gecko packaging discrepancies

[Francois Gouget]

On Mon, 3 Feb 2020, Vincent Povirk (they/them) wrote:

> > * One uses ...<arch>-<version>... the other ...<version>-<arch>...
[...]
> > * Putting the 'architecture' last makes it easier to build the tar 
> 
> None of Wine Mono's build artifacts include an architecture in the
> filename. Bin is not an architecture.

I know. That's why I put architecture in quotes in the second sentence 
above. I'm looking at this entirely from the filename structure point of 
view and how hard it is to build the URL of what I need to download.


> Technically, the msi is x86. If/when we have arm support, we'll need a
> separate msi, and we may want a separate tarball as well.
> 
> Would it be too confusing to list x86 as an architecture when it
> includes x86_64 files too?

I would consider it acceptable in that if we have one file with 'arm' 
(or some equivalent) somewhere in it, then it makes sense to label the 
other with something indicating it's for the 8086 descendants.


-- 
Francois Gouget <fgouget at free.fr>              http://fgouget.free.fr/
     We are Pentium of Borg. You will be approximated. Division is futile.