[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: multiarch/bi-arch status (ETA) question

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Hugo Mills wrote:

On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 02:46:44PM -0400, David Wood wrote:
No, you misunderstand. I don't expect that to work. It's obvious that if
you just made the directory structure switch you still have a long way to
go before you can install two different glibc packages. I'm just saying,
why not make the directory structure switch and then _start_ doing the
work of adding support to the package system/packages. Then, as I said:

"At some point the infrastructure work is done and a big enough subset of
packages are ready, and you can switch. But in the meantime, why not
start? At least make a decision, move the directories..."

  As I think I said in my mail, I don't know enough about the
library-building side of it to comment. I do recall that glibc6 and (I
think) libvorbis were worked on by a couple of people -- one as an
essential part of infrastructure, and the other as a "porting"
example. I do recall that there were significant problems with both,
but I don't recall what those problems were. It was over a year ago
that this was done.

I've done a little bit of work on an example library (libogg), the problem comes with testing. The whole point is to make the libraries coinstallable for different (kernel-compatible) arches. Doing this package management to install stuff so you can test the different paths without dpkg is not very pleasant.

Also, I suspect that most package maintainers won't see much of a point in doing this split and move before there is some point in using it.

The actual package split isn't very hard, for a smaller library:

(This was appliable to libogg as of 21-May-2004, things might look different now.)

/Mattias Wadenstein

Reply to: