On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 18:05 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 07:47:59 -0700, Adam wrote: > > > Of course, that turns the larger question into 'why do we put i686 > > -devel packages in the x86-64 repo, not just the lib packages', > > Because not all files in -devel packages cover multiple target > platforms. Example: You could not build for i686 with headers that > are specific to x86_64, and you would also need the .so symlinks for > libraries in the appropriate libdir. Well, that's only valid if we actually do anything to ensure multilib compilation actually *works*, right now all we enforce is that the packages don't conflict (which isn't the same thing at all). I hope I'm not dragging him into the conversation unwillingly, but Colin Walters raised those points on IRC: <walters> well, what's the ultimate goal? just avoiding the OS exploding if you happen to somehow get an i386 -devel? or actually be able to compile 32 bit on 64 hosts? <walters> those are pretty different things ... <walters> people keep trying to scope creep multilib to include compilation, which we need to clamp down on, and tell them to use mock <Oxf13> well last time we tried to make major changes to our multilib strategy, Jeremy was the one to play Captain No and he's gone now, so.... I guess the point is that if we actually intend to support 'you can cross-compile with any -devel package from another arch that's included in the repository' we may need more strict policies / work to ensure that's actually possible, and if we intend *not* to support that, but rather tell people to use mock, there's no reason to include -devel packages in multilib. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
