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

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

David Wood <obsidian@panix.com> writes:

> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> But you don't realy gain anything by multiarch for amd64. Only 3
>> things come to my mind: OpenOffice, Flash support and w32codecs +
>> 32bit mplayer. And only OO is in Debian.
> Maybe add wine to that list? (Disclaimer, haven't tried it lately)
> I actually have a completely different question. I just re-read the
> multi-arch doc and two things jump out: first, it looks extremely
> non-controvertial, i.e. all parties should at least agree it's simple
> and right - there's nothing wrong with it; second, it looks there's no
> reason to wait to start.
> Am I a bonehead or is it just a matter of moving some directories and
> symlinks around in etch and then the super-gradual process (many many
> years if you want) of migrating things from using the legacy symlinks
> to the multiarch dirs... Why wait to get started? What would break?

gcc, binutils, configure scripts, libtool.

Gcc/Binutils have to search the multiarch paths before any lib with
colliding includes can be packaged. Not sure if all core libs are free
of this.

Configure scripts have sometimes hardcoded paths to /usr/lib.

Libtool adds rpath if libraries are not in default system paths and
rpath means incompatibility to every other linux out there.

And the amount of packages affected by those toolchain issues is
basically everything. So it should not be just done in the hope
nothing breaks.


Reply to: