Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 October 2009 07:34:18 Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 20 October 2009 09:06:29 Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>>>> As I'm building the toolchain myself too, I configure it with the
>>>> 32bit host triplet on each platform, usually disabling multilib.
>>> this doesnt make any sense to me
>> What exactly doesn't make sense to you:
> 
> it doesnt make sense to build your own toolchain when the default native one 
> Gentoo provides includes all multilib support already.
> 
> but i guess when you're commercially developing a binary-only package, people 
> tend to not have such freedoms as the binary-only mentality infects all 
> layers.

Even if it's commercially, it isn't binary-only here. But it is bound
to a specific set of (likely older) toolchain versions usually not
available on the target system.
I just don't want to make an exception for Gentoo Linux hosts when it
does work on both RedHat and SuSE Linux as well as *nix.

>>>> Isn't the intention of multilib to have a new (64bit) system
>>>> be compatible with the corresponding old (32bit) system?
>>> your description of "compatible" is pretty vague.  ignoring /lib ->
>>> /lib64 symlink (which shouldnt matter to any binaries), i'm not aware of
>>> any differences off the top of my head.
>> Well, "compatible" here means to me that when I do
>> $ configure --{build,host}=i686-pc-linux-gnu
> 
> assuming you simply forgot the forcing of -m32 here, or you have a fully named 
> i686-pc-linux-gnu-... toolchain

I do (like to) have a fully qualified i686-pc-linux-gnu-* toolchain.
Adding -m32 would require to create the i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc wrapper,
resulting in some kind of a fully qualified i686 toolchain again.

>> It turns out that it is the "/lib resolving to 64bit" thing only that
>> causes me headaches here, which actually is distro-specific.
> 
> i'm not against changing things to fall in line with what other distros have 
> settled on (guess that's the risk you take when you're one of the first 
> distros to do multilib), i just want this kind of decision to be fully 
> informed / thought out before making it.  it's not something i'd label 
> "trivial".

Fully agreed. But as I don't have time to carry on this symlink change,
I'm going to live with the patches for now (in Prefix).
OTOH, Debian uses /lib->/lib64 symlink too IIRC...

Thank you!
/haubi/