On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:58:15PM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > Some update on this, as we have evolved a lot since the last mail.
> Bdale Garbee a écrit : > >On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 07:10 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > > > >>Moving 32-bit libraries to (/usr)/lib32 won't make the amd64 port > >>compliant with the FHS, which is almost impossible given the current > >>setup, ie 64-bit libraries in /lib. However, it would make it compliant > >>with the part of the FHS which says that alternative libraries have to > >>be in (/usr)/lib<qual>. And it would make us compatible with other > >>distributions like Gentoo or Ubuntu that have choosen to use (/usr)/lib32. > > > > > >What sort of value should we assign to achieving that level of > >"compatibility" with other distributions before multiarch, where I > >expect us to be in the lead and others to be trying to figure out if/how > >to be compatible with Debian? > > > >Part of the reason I'm unhappy about the current FHS situation is that > ><qual> seems generally to get defined as "32" or "64" and the definition > >of what belongs in the unqualified version of the directories feels > >inconsistent across architectures. Part of what I like about our > >multiarch strategy is generalizing this to handle more "interesting" > >cases like emulated execution environments, etc. The world just isn't > >as simple as 32 vs 64 implies... > >I'm inclined to make as few "structural changes" to ia32-libs as > >possible pending multiarch implementation. The reason is that anything > >we change is going to make work for people, including work we can't > >anticipate or judge the scale of, like users who have laboriously worked > >to manually install additional libraries on their systems. If we're > >going to put people through a transition process, I'd prefer it be the > >transition to multiarch! > You have been heard! The glibc currently in incoming has a preliminary > multiarch support. It currently looks to librairies in both (/usr)/lib > and (/usr)/lib/$(host-triplet)/. It support additional libraries (like > the current one in multilib), via ldconfig, with /lib/ldconfig/ being > the configuration directory. > Using this it will be possible to add a link from (/usr)/lib64 to the > multiarch directories to be compliant with the FHS. And that let time to > discuss if we want a (/usr)/lib32 or not on amd64 :). > Currently those directories are supported on all architectures, but only > amd64 has files in them, a libc6 for i386. It will be used as a test > architecture before doing the same on other 32/64 bit architectures, as > there are very few packages to changes. I'm concerned that putting files in /usr/lib/i486-linux-gnu/ may be premature. Has thought been given to what this means for the upgrade path when (...if) dpkg is extended to support installing Arch: i386 multiarch debs directly on amd64? I suppose it should just be a Replaces:, but it still seems like it will be an extra unnecessary transition. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
