1 |
Markos Chandras posted on Fri, 16 Sep 2011 21:25:07 +0300 as excerpted: |
2 |
|
3 |
>> that would be ideal, and drop "amd64" in the process: x86/x86_64/ |
4 |
>> -mike |
5 |
> |
6 |
> Ok so we will probably have the following multilib options |
7 |
> |
8 |
> * x86(ABI=x86_32{/lib}) + amd64(ABI=x86_64{lib64/}) + |
9 |
> x32(ABI=x32{/libx32}) |
10 |
|
11 |
> * x86/amd64 ( what we already have in amd64 multilib ) |
12 |
|
13 |
This one would probably be x86/x86_64 , as Mike said drop amd64. |
14 |
|
15 |
(Tho I much prefer amd64, or if it's changed, something else without a _, |
16 |
which is hard to type, at least on the US/qwerty layout, requiring both |
17 |
hands to get the shift, and two rows up plus over to get the _, amd64 |
18 |
works quite nicely in that regard.) |
19 |
|
20 |
> * x86/x32 |
21 |
> |
22 |
> and |
23 |
> |
24 |
> * x86 (no multilib for 32-bit processors ) ( what we already have in x86 |
25 |
> profile ) |
26 |
|
27 |
Don't forget current amd64/no-multilib. I guess that's be |
28 |
|
29 |
* x86/x86_64/no-multilb |
30 |
|
31 |
(Tho again, I'd prefer keeping amd64, for x86/amd64/no-multilib.) |
32 |
|
33 |
And presumably there's also be |
34 |
|
35 |
* x86/x32/no-multilib |
36 |
|
37 |
-- |
38 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
39 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
40 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |