prepare support for aarch64 in TEMPLATE.info

Hi Dimitri! I heard that you have a lot of free time lately and you are bored. I wanted to help you with this! So, I made a template.info like this:

PRGNAM="name of application"
VERSION="version of application"
HOMEPAGE="homepage of application"
DOWNLOAD="direct download link(s) of application source tarball(s) arch-independent or x86"
DOWNLOAD="http://example.com/generic-package.tar.gz"
MD5SUM="abcd1234"
DOWNLOAD_x86_64="http://example.com/package-x86_64.tar.gz"
MD5SUM_x86_64="efgh5678"
DOWNLOAD_aarch64="http://example.com/package-aarch64.tar.gz"
MD5SUM_aarch64="ijkl9101"
REQUIRES="%README%"
MAINTAINER="name of SlackBuild script maintainer"
EMAIL="email address of maintainer"

Everything worked fine for i?86 and x86_64, because it just ignored the aarch64 entry. Since package managers (sbopkg,slpkg,sbotools*, etc...) dont seems to conflict if in info file exists:

DOWNLOAD_aarch64="http://example.com/package-aarch64.tar.gz"
MD5SUM_aarch64="ijkl9101"

That could be a request by me for TEMPLATE.info in SlackBuilds.org In such case we can have in web page one more source_tarball download link for aarch64 when needed.

That said i went one more step, i patched sbopkg to make it work with aarch64 also. sbopkg works like this: if $ARCH=x86_64 look in info for DOWNLOAD_x86_64=url if set else look to default DOWNLOAD=url Now in my fork sbopkg if system $ARCH=aarch64 first look if DOWNLOAD_aarch64=url is set , elif look DOWNLOAD_x86_64=url is set, else default DOWNLOAD=

I was wondering in your free time :D if you want to take a look at this option for slpkg for a future release.

PS. Personally i dont have aarch64 but now days more and more binary repackage needed and 90% of them are for amd64 and arm64 and the trick to and both tarballs in

DOWNLOAD_x86_64="url/amd64.deb \
 url/arm64.deb"
MD5SUM_x86_64="efgh5678_amd64 \
1234abcd_arm64"

Its not so kool, i mean to download both tarballs and SlackBuild to pick the correct one for repackage...

Think about it althought I didnt have a pull request in SBo so it might not be accepted...

regards rizitis