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

Re: multiarch status update

On 5/15/06, Romain Beauxis <toots@rastageeks.org> wrote:
       Hi all!

On Monday 15 May 2006 14:15, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> > this is a dream. This also need that the application is able to deal
> > with the fact that it has configuration for the 32 and 64 bits version
> > coexisting cleanly.
> True. Did I say that it would be trivial?
> Or even a short-term solution?

So why would you introduce a change that may triger a lot of new complications
and incompatibilities?

To increase flexibility.

I have a multiarch on my amd64 system only because I want to use applications
that I can't use or does not have the same functionalities with amd64 (mostly
firefox, ooo and mplayer then...).
But I'll be happy to have a full amd64 system if only they could provide the
same with it.

So, as for Pierre, a binary package per multiarch system seems obviously the
solution, since a user needs only a given functionalities.

Why would you see many binaries installed from the user point of view?
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

For example because one user would like to have the absolute latest
version of a certain package while other users are satisfied with the
version in stable or testing.

Or because you've got scripts that depend on php4 while you've also
got scripts that depend on php5.

Or because you'd like to compile a binary with libmysqlclient14-dev
and then compile a binary with libmysqlclient15-dev.

Reply to: