Re: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64
> > On Sun, Jul 18, 2004 at 04:36:46PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > For the each base package which provide shared libs, you've got just
> > one deb which supports two architectures. Other packages can keep
> > their current organization (unless there's some real great reason to
> > put together a package which supports both architectures, but almost
> > nothing outside base should need this).
On Sun, Jul 18, 2004 at 06:59:05PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Ok, that is the bload every lib to twice its size way.
Not every lib, just the shared libs in base (and a few other important
> >> And then you get a problem with the -dev package. Because you need two
> >> of them. So now you need /usr/include and /usr/include64.
> > Why do you need two of these?
> > You've got one binary package, why do you need two -dev packages to
> > produce one binary package?
> You need the 32bit and 64bit include files.
Yeah, there's need for gcc/glibc tool chain support for both
architectures. But I think the way you have things organized
now is adequate for that.
> For libc6 and linux-kernel-header you can probably create a package
> with both merged by adding lots of #ifdef to the files. It sure
> would be ugly. And again double the size.
Double the .deb size, for those two packages.
I don't think that you need lots of #ifdefs, however -- just one
conditional at a high level should be sufficient.
> (Ok libc6 has biarch support already, bad example. s/libc6/libfoo/g).
For the general case of libfoo, there's no need to do anything different
from what you're currently doing.