On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 05:39:37PM -0400, Michel Salim wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >> > unflattened != multiarch
> >> > unflattened == choose libcombo at runtime
> >> > flattened == choose libcombo at buildtime
> >>
> >> Hm. We don't support mixing lesstif and openmotif either. Is libfoundation
> >> incompatible with gnustep-base?
> >
> > While not an expert on gnustep, I think the differences are not just
> > different implementations of the same API/ABI, I believe the libs are
> > supposed to have different APIs. Many applications (all?) require
> > specific libcombos to be built against.
> >
> >> Anyway, here's an idea:
> >> Put binaries in unflattened %{_libdir}/GNUstep/* and symlink to /usr/bin.
> >
> > Binaries are probably not an issue, IMHO there are just some bugs in
> > gnustep's implementation of the FHS (like /usr/bin/x86_64 subdirs,
> > which we must truncate back).
>
> So:
> - binaries can be flattened
> - library structure can be simplified:
> currently: %{_prefix}/lib/<arch>/linux-gnu/gnu-gnu-gnu
> proposed: %{_libdir}/linux-gnu/gnu-gnu-gnu
> (remove <arch> as we'll only ever deal with 32-bit/64-bit parallel
> installs, and %{_libdir} handles this)
>
> or perhaps even %{_libdir}/GNUstep/gnu-gnu-gnu?
>
> If someone could point to a libFoundation set-up, we can see which of
> linux-gnu and gnu-gnu-gnu can be done away with.
Just replace gnu-gnu-gnu with gnu-fd-gnu or gnu-fd-nil. The layout is
given by gnustep-make for all consumers independent of the combo.
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpsbnji6p77l.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
