| 1 |
> |
| 2 |
> Haven't I told you using two-level libdirs is stupid? So yes, |
| 3 |
> please do that and let us be happy once again. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> That said, where does lp64gc land? Or isnon-multilib |
| 6 |
> one-or-the-other the goal? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
It would be non-multilib one-or-the-other then for us. |
| 9 |
The main relevant combination is rv64gc/lp64d, which is arguably what |
| 10 |
a linux machine "should have". |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
(I could also imagine to keep rv64imac/lp64 profile and stages (also |
| 13 |
using lib64), these would have to mask stuff like rust then though.) |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
(Unless Palmer et al come up with a fix for the libdirs on the |
| 16 |
upstream side of things. Already e.g. libdir=lib64-lp64d would be much |
| 17 |
easier to handle I suspect.) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
Andreas K. Hüttel |
| 21 |
dilfridge@g.o |
| 22 |
Gentoo Linux developer |
| 23 |
(council, toolchain, base-system, perl, libreoffice) |
Archives