> > Bi-arch being less painful than multiarch, in my > > opinion -- it needs to touch far fewer packages: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-amd64/2004/07/msg00244.html
On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 11:43:00AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > This is only true if you do a half-ass[1] job w/ bi-arch. This isn't, > and never has been, the intent of the amd64 porters. Multiarch is > coming and will take quite a while to do but we will be much better off > for it. We will also give our users the ability to use their systems to > their fullest potential- not just as a platform upon which to run > binary-only commercial apps. I dispute your half-ass assertion. biarch is useful for systems in transition. That means people upgrading from 32 bit systems, and people working with packages which haven't been ported -- for whatever reason. There's little to no gain in making every package biarch. So there's no point in calling a plan to not do so "half-ass". And, frankly, the current pure64 port already includes most of what biarch needs. -- Raul
