On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 02:26:08AM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > In contast the bin64 proposal does not even have to look into the > specfile (unless the specfile hardcoded /usr/bin or does other > forbidden things we already have purged away from Fedora), no > subpackage inflation, no overcmplicated intra- and interpackage > depency relations, no tadpole loop depedencies. The biggest issue I see with any bin64 issue is that you have a *huge* installed base of legacy software (and legacy software developers) who just assume that you can set a clean PATH to /usr/bin:/bin, and possibly /usr/sbin:/sbin. Lots of security-conscious software will do things like reset the PATH. Now all of a sudden, that no longer works. You have to either trust that PATH isnt set maliciously, or you have to know the arch you are on and that arch's specific peculariarities: prefer bin32 or bin64? etc. This sounds like a lot of pain and agony for lots of people and third-party software. -- Michael -- 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
