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

Re: How to depend on 32bit libs on amd64? (and what to do with ia32-libs)

* Goswin von Brederlow [Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:00:08 +0200]:

> The alternative solution is ia32-archive, which creates a local
> repository of converted packages on the users system. No wrappers
> needed and no ugly hacks but that comes at the cost of disk space and
> the need to configure what packages to convert (converting just
> everything would cost too much disk).

Right, and I think that’s suboptimal from an useability POV: `apt-get
install wine` should work on amd64 out of the box, without needing to
do extra work, IMHO.

> Buildds don't have internet access in their build
> environment. ia32-libs may not download anything at build time.

I guess when you replied to this you hadn’t gotten to the part where I
said ia32-libs would be a “package with special needs”.

> Plus rebuilding would give widely unreproducible results.

Would behave the same as other packages already do (linux modules,

> Currently the size makes regular uploads too costly imho. And the
> security team is still not supporting ia32-libs. I even did prepare an
> security upload for etch last year that they only had to sponsor but
> never heard back from the team.

With my proposed hack, the upload size would be just the binary
packages, since the source would not be duplicated. Surely the Security
Team can cope with that, if they so wish. (And/or if the package would
have an arch:all package, eg. with scripts, you can get away with
uploading only that one.)

P.S.: In case it isn’t clear already, my only goal is that the hack we
may have in place while we get multiarch, is an acceptable one. I would
really like for it to be in place as little time as possible.


- Are you sure we're good?
- Always.
        -- Rory and Lorelai

Reply to: