Re: A More Radical Multi-Arch Counter-Proposal
On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 10:26:45AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Bill Allombert <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Do you imply that some design decisions will make the above arrangement
> > impossible ? Or that a native amd64 port is out of the question ?
> Every other linux is already using /lib, /lib32, /lib64 to make
> multiarch binaries work. That means upstream authors get patches for
> that way. Starting something new means Debian will stand alone.
No Linux distribution provide multiarch today. But you do not answer my
question: Will the multiarch allow me to install both chroot with only
one arch in each as mentionned above ?
> A chroot is also a far worse choice to have multiarch support then the
> existing and perfectly working lib64. There is just no reason to give
> that up.
Why ? I find a chroot way cleaner than hard-coding a bit-length in a
path. Are we going to have lib128 and lib256 ?
> Think about what it means for mips, sparc, s390 and powerpc.
As far as I know, chroot(2) exist on those platforms.
Imagine a large red swirl here.