On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 02:47:35AM +0100, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > On Thursday, January 5, 2017 5:08:16 PM CET Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > Two suggestions were raised as alternatives to the container approach: > > > > * Switch to using the Debian style of multi-arch layout, which instead of > > /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 uses /usr/lib/$ARCH-linux-gnu. Benefits to this would > > include the emergence of a de-facto standard for system layout between the major > > distributions. > > Isn't this just result of good marketing of "multi-arch" distros? Because > I fail to see where that approach is superior compared to what we have. Partly because there exist more than 2 architectures (think: RV64G/RV64GC/RV128G, ARMv5/6/7/8, or less esoterically, having various CPU features like SSE or AVX compiled in and out). Partly because there will be fewer differences between Fedora & Debian/Ubuntu which means less friction and more chance of a random proprietary binary simply working. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines. Supports shell scripting, bindings from many languages. http://libguestfs.org _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
