Le dim 11/01/2004 à 08:00, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit : > The currently implemented idea was to rename the amd64 package of > libfoobar to lib64foobar and have amd64 binary packages depend on that > name instead. libfoobar.so goes to /lib and lib64foobar.so to > /lib64. That works so far. Am I the only one to think the whole /lib64 idea is fundamentally broken? We already have ia64 without this. We can build a very similar system for amd64, introducing a new arch. Then, ship a few 32-bit compatibility libraries for 32-bit proprietary software. Or is this choice made just because Redhat already made it? What is good for Redhat is not necessarily good for us. We already have 64-bit arches, we already deal with them properly, and we need almost no changes to our infrastructure to introduce amd64 as a whole new arch. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\ : :' : josselin.mouette@ens-lyon.org `. `' joss@debian.org `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e=2E?=