On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 12:56:45PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> But doing something big like that only in Fedora seem utterly wrong to
> me and makes us to much "special" and different from others. If
> something like that really is wanted it IMHO should be done in
> cooperation with other distros and/or the LSB, as changes like
> {/usr,}/{s,}bin64 breaks a lot of expectations and requirements people,
> apps and scripts currently have.
Sure, but before contacting these groups, we need to know whether *we*
want this model.
This has been discussed "upstream" in the multilib/multiarch proposals
(and even as recently as at the fosdem) and the consensus is that the
current interested parties did not have the demand, yet, but if the
demand comes up they will be open to it. So it will not come as a
surprise if we ask the FHS to discuss for the next draft (which is
happening now!) to allow for bin64.
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgp1wuazMqpUX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
