On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 07:39:17AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:10:54AM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:28:19PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > > > Ok, if I understood correctly, changes in comparison with what we have now > > > are: > > > > > > - A more standarised pathset, instead of just /emul/ia32-linux. > > > According to > > > http://wiki.debian.org/toolchain-multiarch, there are plans to make the > > > toolchain aware of the new paths. Sounds a lot like post-etch, but > > > AFAIK > > > we can do the same without it (by using --libdir at build time, and > > > adequate > > > /etc/ld.so.conf at runtime) > > > > > > - dpkg / dak / katie major rework (I haven't read in-depth, but I assume > > > the > > > point is using the same ia32 code from the i386 port without compiling > > > it > > > separately. Definitely post-etch..) > > > > > > Did I miss something? Is someone able to guess which of them is Daniel > > > concerned with? > > > > And the crucial points: > > - generalised: works on any architecture, not just amd64/i386, > > - non-intrusive: dak/dpkg changes are easy. changing every package to > > have such horrendous hacks as this, with hardcoded > > triplets, is never going to fly, > > - cleaner: see previous two. > > Ok I give up. Would be nice if someone had told me when I filed #381342 19 > days > ago, though.
Oh, as for the bugs, the patches don't really harm, so I won't close them. Feel free to apply, ignore or keep open untill the good solution is ready. -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
