On 22 January 2016 at 09:05, Paul Howarth <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 21/01/16 22:24, Ian Malone wrote: >> >> Since RHEL/CentOS 7 already does not exist in a native 32bit version I >> do wonder what would actually be running in a hypothetical >> mock/container/VM to build and run 32 bit systems down the road if >> multilib went away. > > > CentOS 7 does now have a 32-bit version: > > http://seven.centos.org/2015/10/centos-linux-7-32-bit-x86-i386-architecture-released/ > While interesting to know, that is a CentOS SIG effort. If you are using RHEL you presumably aren't supported for it, and I'm giving it as an example of the way things are going. In any case I find this whole 'just build in mock' as a work around for what is basically a packaging problem a rather weak fix. Why is multilib devel install of libraries any more difficult than multilib install of run time libraries? They live in the same place. If the issue is header includes and documentation conflicting, if that's a real problem then shouldn't it be .noarch? -- imalone http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
