Re: multiarch/bi-arch status (ETA) question
email@example.com (Lennart Sorensen) writes:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 03:04:56PM -0400, David Wood wrote:
>> I don't understand. As far as I could see the problem you raised was what
>> a (finished) multiarch solves.
> Multiarch was never finished as far as I know.
>> I keep saying it. There's a symlink. It's backwards-compatible! There is
>> no package building involved to get started!
>> If I have /usr/lib
>> and suddenly it becomes a symlink to /usr/lib/i386-linux/
If you think about it that can't work.
What can work is having ldconfig create the library symlinks in
/usr/lib/i386-linux/ and /usr/lib/. You would have to choose one of
i386 or amd64 as default to be linked into /usr/lib though.
>> What's the problem? Yes, it will take work to _finish_, but why haven't we
>> even _started_?
> Many packages/programs have hardcoded paths in them which will look in
> /usr/lib and not in your new directory.
That would be a policy violation already. RC bug.
> Also not at all compatible with existing software on any architecture.
> Len Sorensen
Only foreign software with needless rpaths might have problems with
moved libs as Debian already requires this flexibility. The moved libs
are also still standard conform as only the location of the LD is