Re: AMD64 and lib64
Kevin Rosenberg <kevin@rosenberg.net> writes:
> You likely know more about multiarch that me. But the consensus on
> #debian-amd64 seems to be that multiarch is a more robust replacement
> for biarch. It seems there are people who are willing to work on
> multiarch, but not on biarch.
>
> My thoughts in summary:
> - biarch is very good, but I don't forsee anyone developing it for
> Debian. I'd like to be shown to be wrong on this, so if someone
> wants to work on this -- this is a good time to speak up.
> If you really need a biarch system, it's easiest to just run a
> different operating system.
> - The debian pure64 port runs well and is a better OS for an AMD64
> system than the i386 distribution. Some people will need a 32-bit chroot
> for compatibility. I've had some, but not complete, luck with the
> ia32-libs package for compatibility with 32-bit binaries
> - multiarch is a transition approach for pure64 for running 32-bit
> and 64-bit binaries. However, I'm not aware it will solve issues
> with running 32-bit binaries that are compiled for the LSB.
>
> My recommendations:
> Unless one or more people come forward and say they will work on
> supporting biarch, I think the pure64 bit port should be accepted
> into sid as the best solution that Debian can provide.
The difference between biarch and multiarch comes down to 2 main
points:
1. sanitizing the lib/lib32/lib64 dirs to a universal approach.
Currently you need 3 flavours of i386 packages, one for i386/amd64
(using lib), one for ia64 (using lib32) and one for
powerpc/bsd-i386 (using emul/i386-linux). Using lib/<arch>-<kernel>
always solves this problem beautifully.
2. Debian packaging of common files
Biarch never finally solved the problem of common files across
archs and various proposals where there ranging from dpkg linking
files around to renaming every deb.
Multiarch merged some of them and requires a strict split of common
files into -all debs while keeping libs and headers out of each
others way.
Actually multiarch is just the logical extension and renaming of
biarch because its for more than 2 archs. It's just a refinement to
the biarch problem.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: