On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 03:53 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:27:26 -0700, Christopher Stone wrote: > > > > Hi this may be a little off-topic or a stupid question, but I recently > > > tried to build a 32-bit application on Fedora's x86_64 arch. I > > > thought that all I needed to do was add -m32 to the CFLAGS and LDFLAGS > > > to the makefile, but as it turns out the linking was problematic. It > > > turns out I did not have the 32-bit .so file needed for linking, so I > > > attempted to install it with "yum install expat-devel.i386" but yum > > > was unable to find the package. Basically I needed to hard code a > > > softlink in order to get the application to link. > > > > > > So the bottom line I guess is, how do I install a 32bit devel package > > > on a Fedora x86_64 system? And if 32bit libraries are provided as > > > default for this system, why aren't their 32bit devel counterparts > > > also provided? > > > > > > > After thinking about this a bit I realize the devel packages would > > conflict with the header files. A multilib-ready package does not conflict in its header files. It implements an arch-independent API. > > It seems to me that the best solution to this problem is to create > > noarch and arch specific devel packages. So header files can go in > > the noarch part and the .a and .so files can go in the arch specific > > part. The noarch package would depend on the arch specific one. > > That doesn't make much sense, since files with the same checksum don't > conflict and can be in multiple packages. The conflicts would be in > the arch-specific files (e.g. arch-specific header contents). Ralf -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
