Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@×××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-portage-dev] biarch support for portage-ng?
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 05:08:05
1 (I may be misguided in some of this because I've never actually used Gentoo.)
3 I plan on switching Gentoo soon on my AMD64 machine. I haven't yet found a
4 distro that handled 32-bit compatibility well (debian's way just sounds
5 pointless, fedora fails miserably, SuSE is decent), but it seems like
6 Gentoo has the potential to do very well. Here's an idea:
8 For each ebuild (slot), portage would allow multiple architectures to be
9 "installed." One would be "master" -- this works normally. Everything
10 thereafter would be a "compat" install or something -- only libraries (that
11 is, files that do not exist in the master) would get installed.
13 So:
15 foo - AMD64 (master) installs /usr/bin/foo, /etc/foo.conf, and
16 /usr/lib64/
17 foo - x86 (compat) installs only /usr/lib/
19 Then packages should by default depend on their own arch's version.
20 Furthermore, a "default" arch should be selectable, so that, if amd64 was
21 default, x86's gtk would depend on amd64's gtk, and amd64's would be
22 installed as master. A tool to switch from x86 master to amd64 master (by
23 remerging both) would be nice, as ebuilds will be gradually fixed to work
24 on amd64.
26 Some provision for arch-independant ebuilds would also help.
29 With a feature like this, I want to be able to do:
30 # emerge --arch x86 gtk
32 so that I can run some 32-bit binary. I then want
33 # emerge --arch amd64 --master gtk
34 to build the amd64 version and replace any executables that the x86 build
35 may have installed, so x86 becomes the slave.
37 Is something like this reasonable?
39 --Andy
41 --
42 gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list