Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Olivier CrĂȘte" <tester@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] mulltiib cruft: /emul
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 14:32:03
Message-Id: 1156170558.7841.6.camel@TesterBox.tester.ca
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] mulltiib cruft: /emul by Herbie Hopkins
1 On Mon, 2006-21-08 at 12:21 +0100, Herbie Hopkins wrote:
2 > On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 11:43:13AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
3 > > someone remind me why our emul packages install in some obscure directory tree
4 > > rooted in /emul
5 > >
6 > > if we moved these things to the standard lib32 dirs, it would certainly ease
7 > > the pain of people doing multilib building, both in and out of portage
8 >
9 >
10 > Mike, Sorry I missed you on irc yesterday, didn't get back til later than
11 > expected.
12 >
13 > I'm not sure why /emul was originally chosen though it's a choice I've
14 > just gone along with whilst maintaining these packages.
15
16 It was chosen because emul packages are put in /emul on ia64.
17
18 > I've always viewed the emul libs as a temporary measure until we had full multilib
19 > fuctionality in portage. Afaik the only person working on this was
20 > eradicator who has been mia for a while now so I'm unsure weather this
21 > is ever likely to arise. Given that it looks like we'll be stuck with
22 > these binary libs for some time yet then we may as well do as you
23 > suggest and install them in a standard location to make building against
24 > them a bit easier. I'll look into doing this when I next version bump the
25 > packages.
26
27 I still believe we should reserve the regular directory for the real
28 multilib stuff, otherwise it will be very painful when we decide to
29 move. And continue to put the stopgap binary packages in /emul.
30
31 --
32 Olivier CrĂȘte
33 tester@g.o

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] mulltiib cruft: /emul Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>