Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Herbie Hopkins <herbs@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] mulltiib cruft: /emul
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 11:25:36
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] mulltiib cruft: /emul by Mike Frysinger
1 On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 11:43:13AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
2 > someone remind me why our emul packages install in some obscure directory tree
3 > rooted in /emul
4 >
5 > if we moved these things to the standard lib32 dirs, it would certainly ease
6 > the pain of people doing multilib building, both in and out of portage
9 Mike, Sorry I missed you on irc yesterday, didn't get back til later than
10 expected.
12 I'm not sure why /emul was originally chosen though it's a choice I've
13 just gone along with whilst maintaining these packages. I've always
14 viewed the emul libs as a temporary measure until we had full multilib
15 fuctionality in portage. Afaik the only person working on this was
16 eradicator who has been mia for a while now so I'm unsure weather this
17 is ever likely to arise. Given that it looks like we'll be stuck with
18 these binary libs for some time yet then we may as well do as you
19 suggest and install them in a standard location to make building against
20 them a bit easier. I'll look into doing this when I next version bump the
21 packages.
23 Herbs
26 --
27 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] mulltiib cruft: /emul "Olivier CrĂȘte" <tester@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] mulltiib cruft: /emul Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] mulltiib cruft: /emul Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>