| 1 |
Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 08:25:05 +0100, lee wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> [...] |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> That there are a few special cases for which some people still need it |
| 9 |
>> doesn't mean that everyone should be forced to use a multilib profile |
| 10 |
>> when 100% of the software they're running is 64bit. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Firstly, things like Flash and Skype are not special cases, they are |
| 13 |
> widely used and many of us have to use them, whether we like it or not. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
They are special cases. Flash never really worked, and when it does, |
| 16 |
it's pretty much unusable because it's too crappy. Skype only kinda |
| 17 |
works and is not usable due to total lack of privacy. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> Secondly, no one is forcing you to use anything? There is a no-multilib |
| 20 |
> profile, |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
There doesn't seem to be a desktop profile that isn't multilib. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> and nothing to stop you creating a no-multilib version of your |
| 25 |
> preferred desktop profile if you so wish (the desktop profiles are |
| 26 |
> basically a different set of default USE flags). |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I wouldn't know how to do that. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
In any case, the default is simply wrong. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> Multilib should be gong away on due time. Until then you have two courses |
| 33 |
> of action: complain about it or use a no-multilib profile with your |
| 34 |
> preferred flags. Only one of those choices has any real benefit. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
There is no non-multilib profile one could use when they want a desktop |
| 37 |
profile. Perhaps multilib goes away in 20 years or so, or never. That |
| 38 |
doesn't help. |
Archives