On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 05:38:58PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Lo! On 05.01.2017 17:03, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > [...] > > ## Advantages > > > > * Simplification of build-tree creation. We wouldn't have to maintain the lists > > and hacks that are required to make sure that multilib packages land in the > > correct repositories. > > [...] > > Just wondering: Why don't we switch to a multilib/multiarch solution > similar to the one that Debian/Ubuntu uses? They put libs in directories > like /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu and /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu > (https://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/Implementation > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MultiarchSpec ). If we'd switch to a similar > solution a new (de facto) standard might evolve and in the end nobody > would have to deal with hacks any more, because all major distros would > put libs in the same directories. Iirc their model has benefits for > cross-compilation, too. IMHO this is a much better idea. Also being closer to Debian means less hacking required to build GCC (or at least, it's the same hacking as Debian needs). Also we can kill /usr/lib64 finally. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines. Boot with a live CD or over the network (PXE) and turn machines into KVM guests. http://libguestfs.org/virt-v2v _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
