Re: powerpc64, multiarch vs biarch and etch ...
Raphael Hertzog <email@example.com> writes:
> On Sat, 03 Jun 2006, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> There just is no anti-multiarch movement that needs a change of
>> mind. Apart from ftp-master blocking the glibc split there has only
>> been inaction or disintrest but no opposition.
> So submitting patches (like you do) is the right thing to do and will
> bring result since the maintainers are not opposed to it.
> In fact, everyone is for multi-arch but there's no consensus on the best
> way to do it within core tools like dpkg.
Dpkg and apt are the last packages that will/have to change to
multiarch. Before multiarch can be installed all essential/required
libraries need to be converted to multiarch specs. And for it to be
usefull a bunch of other libs need to change too. I had hoped that
after sarge we could have kicked off the binutils/gcc/ld changes
within weeks and start converting packages. Instead it took years
leaving hardly any time to patch libs now.
Dpkg and apt could have been changed in etch+1 and backports and still
allow stable etch to be installed as multiarch. That was the dream