architecture names (i386-linux, etc.)

[Daniel Quinlan <quinlan@transmeta.com>]

[ redirected to the lsb-spec mailing list ]

>> perl and modperl packages install libs in dirs inconsistently under
>> /usr/lib/perl5xxxxxx with different dir names/structures....
>> - this should be addressed by FHS
>> - perl owners should be contacted and consulted
>> 
>> --- related issue, should also consider a standard for x86
>>     architecture package naming (e.g. for i386 v i586 v i686, etc)

Alan Cox writes:

> Perl is unsuitable for specification. There is no fixed grammar for
> perl. Each perl script is potentially precisely dependant on a perl
> revision and may break arbitarily.

I agree that we can't include Perl in the LSB specification.  (I would
still encourage any distribution that has this issue to contact the
perl5 porters mailing list.)

On the other issue, it might be helpful if there was some sort of
standard for x86 architecture names.

Does "i686-linux" mean "only runs on a Pentium Pro or above" or does
"i686-linux" mean optimized for Pentium Pro, but still runs on i386?
I thought it meant the former, not the latter.  Unfortunately, a some
number of packages just assign the number according to the system the
package was compiled on, not the target system.

- Dan