Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Michael Haubenwallner <haubi@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: multilib and the compatibility to singlelib
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:19:35
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: multilib and the compatibility to singlelib by Mike Frysinger
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/