Removing dpkg arch definition for arm64ilp32?

[Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>]

Hi!

On Fri, 2023-10-27 at 20:17:21 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 02:29:30PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > Are either of those ports (armeb/arm64ilp32) actually useful / alive
> > at this point?
> 
> Not that I have seen.  I didn't think anything other than the IXP ever
> really used big endian and that's a long time ago.  arm64ilp32 seems
> to serve less purpose than x32 did (and x32 doesn't seem to be doing
> much either).  Certainly looks essentially dead at this point.

While scanning the libc-alpha list recently I read [M] that arm64ilp32
was never upstreamed in Linux nor glibc? If so, I think there's little
point in carrying the arch definitions in dpkg, and I guess that would
not make the cut if requested now (for reference this was requested in
bug #824742). Does anyone know whether it was ever used or it is being
used even if privately/internally somewhere? I'd think that could be a
good argument to make an exception, and keep this for a while still. I
see no usage of this arch in Debian Sources files for example, so it'd
seem safe to remove the arch definition in the Debian context.

[M] <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2023-November/152521.html>

For armeb, I assume it was properly upstreamed at the time, and it was
actually used, even if it's currently not in use (like arm) I see tons
of references in Sources files, and thus removing the arch definitions
for either of these would not be safe right now I think.

Thanks,
Guillem