On 01/06/2017 08:14 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
[snip]
Much of what I would have said has been said by Oron (some of this
I've said in earlier parts of this thread, as well). But the bigger
thing is that it makes it much easier to bootstrap new architectures
for Fedora, too, as we can start from libraries and build up to
applications relatively easily. It doesn't completely solve the issue,
as there would still be some conflicts, but it makes it a lot less
challenging. Enabling things like being able to do test and
development with arbitrary architectures would be a huge boon, as
well.
[snip]
Yes, beyond Oron's focus on embedded development the general reality
is that it is a plain useful mechanism for using OS+architecture to do
work on a different OS+architecture. We could really have used
something like this for the armhfp bootstrap, or the aarch64
bootstrap, or the ppc64le bootstrap. Add in the judicious use of qemu
as the suse team does and making something new is considerably less
hard. X32, ilp32, mips, etc all face chicken-and-egg problems in
bootstrap that this simplifies. Who knows what will be next?
Multilib is likewise useful for backward compatibility across major
releases and distributions. If third party software vendors only had
to qualify their software on one release of one distribution with the
expectation that it would run on all because the dynamic libraries
were available on all it would be a real win for Linux as a whole.
The fact we don't have that is part of what is driving container adoption.
--
Brendan Conoboy / RHEL Development Coordinator / Red Hat, Inc.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
