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

Re: When will amd64 be allowed in sid?

Chris Cheney <ccheney@cheney.cx> writes:

> On Sun, May 09, 2004 at 11:38:40PM +0200, Michael Neuffer wrote:
>> Quoting Kurt Roeckx (Q@ping.be):
>> > On Sat, May 08, 2004 at 07:33:10PM +0200, Michael Neuffer wrote:
>> > > 
>> > > Additionally it is necessary that we build this port in a way that 
>> > > we don't block the paths to a simple migration to a biarch ports
>> > > from the 64bit pure port.
>> > > 
>> > > I think this is what most pure 64bit protagonists don't like to 
>> > > think about because it makes things much more complicated for them.
>> > 
>> > I thought we didn't want biarch and wanted multiarch.  And I
>> > think it should be easier to migrate from pure64 to multiarch.
>> How do you define the difference between biarch and multiarch ?
> biarch is the old /lib /lib64 FHS/LSB way. Multiarch is the new system
> that uses /lib/(gcc version)/ with symlinks for /lib /lib64 which can
> support more than two archs on the same system. I believe that aj and
> taggart have more information on their websites.
> Chris

No, biarch is two archs. Multiarch is multiple archs, like mips O32,
N32 and N64, or ppc, ppc64 and i386. Multiarch came up because biarch
just doesn't fit when talking about systems with 3 archs.

The idea to rearange the /lib, /lib32 and /lib64 dirs somewhat is
another matter that applis to biarch just as well as multiarch.

More to the point the biarch/multiarch code written for amd64 gets its
library location from dpkg-libinfo and apart from that one file it is
ignorant of the exact locations. That was the aim anyway.


Reply to: