Re: Etch and multi-arch
* Steve Langasek
(corrected subject :)
| > There may be a few other things missing, but basically the multi-arch
| > people have to show a clear plan _now_ how and why this migration is
| > supposed to happen.
|
| Yes, although nothing's made it to the list yet about this (was going to
| start a separate thread for that this week, actually), I have had
| conversations with Tollef, Matt (Taggart) and the ftp-masters about
| multiarch to get a handle on what the issues are.
|
| It seems that we do have a basic proof-of-concept (Tollef's link), but
| neither the LSB folks nor the ftp-masters are sold on the idea yet; the
| ftp-masters seem to think there have been too many, mutually
| incompatible proposals floating around. Having basic support for
| multiarch in glibc/dpkg/toolchain seems sound, but actually using it in
| Debian packages for etch seems to hinge on the other concerns above.
What people seem to be disagreeing about is the package system
implementation, not the file system implementation. Matt Taggart's
ideas are on http://www.linuxbase.org/futures/ideas/multiarch/ .
People seem fairly happy about those.
I am implementing those in packages as well as one implementation on
how it can look in dpkg. My dpkg implementation might turn out to not
work as well as intended, if so, we do at least have aj's proposal to
fall back to.
--
Tollef Fog Heen ,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' :
`. `'
`-
Reply to: