Re: AMD64 for sarge [Re: <rant> Package: ftpmasters, Severity: serious, ...]

[John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org>]

On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 10:35:34AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 09:48:12AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > to.  The /lib vs. /lib64 hack is bad and wrong and will be going away 
> > in favor of multiarch, a much cleaner and more elegant solution.  
> 
> The rest of the universe appears to disagree with the Debian AMD64
> porters on this issue, including existing Linux distributions and
> commercial Unices.

What you haven't convinced me of is the relevance of this point to start
with, since Debian AMD64 does not support 32-bit binaries at this time.
The existing setup is completely cmopatible with AMD64 binaries from
other platforms.

Of course, when 32-bit support arrives, it will likely be via multiarch
and the whole /lib vs. /lib64 question will probably be irrelevant.  But
of course, we can put in relevant symlinks at that tmie so that
cmopatibility with others' ia32 and amd64 distributions is assured.

But we do not support 32-bit now.  What is the big deal?