[Bug 1559578] Re: fwupdate-signed: arch-qualified package names, but not coinstallable

[Mario Limonciello]

Before doing this transition, I just want to confirm it's the correct
approach to take.

Maintaining the ability to be co-installable would seem appealing in the
event that you are running on a 64 bit architecture with a 32 bit EFI
implementation for example.

So yes, currently they all contain /usr/lib/fwupdate/version, but I
don't think there is actually a reason to include this in all of the
binary packages.  To my knowledge this information is not used by any
other packages.  A matter of fact the same information can be found in
the version field of the package.

 Version: 1.8+0.5-2ubuntu2

What do you think about just removing the version file?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Foundations Bugs, which is subscribed to fwupdate-signed in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1559578

Title:
  fwupdate-signed: arch-qualified package names, but not coinstallable

Status in fwupdate-signed package in Ubuntu:
  New

Bug description:
  The fwupdate-signed source package produces binary packages that each
  have the architecture name: fwupdate-{amd64,arm64,armhf,i386}-signed.
  However, unlike in the case of grub, these binary packages are not
  coinstallable, as each contains the file /usr/lib/fwupdate/version.

  Given this, I don't see any reason to have the architecture name in
  the package name.  I would suggest renaming all the binary packages to
  'fwupdate-signed' instead.

  Since the fwupdate-amd64-signed binary package was already in the
  archive, I didn't consider this a blocker for binary NEW and have let
  the others in.  A resolution for this bug should include appropriate
  transition handling for all architectures.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fwupdate-signed/+bug/1559578/+subscriptions