On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Daniel Ruoso wrote: > Em Qua, 2005-09-28 às 18:41 +0000, Miquel van Smoorenburg escreveu: > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > > Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >The i386 packages won't be compatible with my i386-uclibc environment > > >(as I won't have glibc installed). So I started calling the architecture > > >i386-uclibc with gnu name i386-uclibc-linux. And I'd like to ask: Is it > > >OK? > > Search for 'multiarch'. I understand (and/or hope) that in etch > > the multiarch effort will get off the ground. > > Hmmm... Interesting... If I follow this, it gives me one more reason to > see it as another architecture, and when the multiarch support get off > the ground I will benefit too.
Wouldn't it be better off as a *subarchitecture* ? (are subarchs supported by multiarch at all?) Adding archs is not that straight forward. e.g. what the heck will happen when someone tries to use config.sub or config.guess? What *should* happen then? -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh
