Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: mulltiib cruft: /emul
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 15:03:40
Message-Id: ebct42$plk$
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] mulltiib cruft: /emul by Mike Frysinger
1 Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> posted
2 200608081143.13375.vapier@g.o, excerpted below, on Tue, 08 Aug
3 2006 11:43:13 -0400:
5 > looks like your mail server ate this ...
6 >
7 > someone remind me why our emul packages install in some obscure
8 > directory tree rooted in /emul
9 >
10 > if we moved these things to the standard lib32 dirs, it would certainly
11 > ease the pain of people doing multilib building, both in and out of
12 > portage
13 >
14 > it'd also let us free up env.d crap ... but most importantly, it'll stop
15 > breaking my friggin tab completion for /etc
17 It came thru b4. As an amd64 user, I've been hoping a member of the arch
18 team would reply, as it's a question that seeing it asked, I'm now curious
19 about myself, but nothing yet.
21 Pure speculation here, but the idea /might/ have been to separate prebuilt
22 binary stuff into /emul, so it wouldn't conflict with future multiarch
23 portage support (which would presumably use /lib32), which IIRC was hoped
24 to be here by now, but turned out to be rather complicated and had no
25 portage devs which had that particular itch they needed to scratch, so...
26 (IOW, no blame or finger pointing, just that we'd hoped it'd be here by
27 2.1, and it isn't, and that's a fact amd64 continues to have to deal with.)
29 As I said, pure speculation, likely wrong, but that's the first logical
30 thing that came to my mind. I too am interested in a real answer.
32 --
33 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
34 "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
35 and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
37 --
38 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


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