Re: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64
Raul Miller <moth@debian.org> writes:
> On Sat, Jul 17, 2004 at 05:49:41PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> [d] multiarch systems where each arch has advantages over the others
>
> This should be outside the scope of package management. It's a build
> time decision, not a system configuration decision.
Handling 64bit support for 32/64bit archs just like the cmove or mmx
feature of i386 is just wrong. They don't compare. You can't replace
the 32bit libc with the better 64bit libc, you need both. You are
talking about completly different ld.so, opcodes, abis, syscalls,
parameter passing conventions, cpu features, size of types, .... Not
just a few extra opcodes.
> [That said, if we want to support "build packages from source with custom
> options, that makes it viable to support this kind of fine control.
> Though there's likely to be some cost in user confusion.]
multiarch could be used to create (very partial) i586, i686,
k7,... ports and have them transparently be used depending on the cpu
type. The biarch discussions had this in mind but it wasn't used for
the multiarch proposal. With multiarch you wouldn't be able to use the
i686 libc in place of the i386 libc. dpkg wouldn't undertsand that
they are the same ABI.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: