On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 14:35 +1300, Jerome Brown wrote: > Sorry. What I meant was that as the default-linux/amd64/multilib-dev/lib > is intended as the replacement for 2004.3/lib64, it seems confusing to > then add a default-linux/amd64/multilib-dev/lib64 which not the expected > upgrade path from 2004.3/lib64, unless you intend that people should use > it rather than the lib profile. My suggestion is that you consider > naming what you called default-linux/amd64/multilib-dev/lib > default-linux/amd64/multilib-dev/lib64 and what you called > default-linux/amd64/multilib-dev/lib64 either > default-linux/amd64/multilib-dev/lib or > default-linux/amd64/multilib-dev/lib32 so as to remove the confusion for > people when upgrading their profiles. I know that I would look at the > lib64 profile and assume that that was the correct upgrade path for me > to use. > > Hope that is a bit clearer
Ok, now I see what you mean... Actually, the multilib-dev/* profiles
are dev profiles, and aren't intended for end-users... in fact they
depend on some packages that are -* and patches which aren't in portage
yet. I suspect the upgrade path will be more along the lines of:
2004.3/lib64 -> 2005.0
2004.3 -> 2005.0
where 2005.0 is the current multilib-dev/lib profile with a
MULTILIB_ABIS="amd64" and ABI="amd64" in make.defaults to restrict it to
the current behavior (compiling only 64bit packages)... this is just
changing from the CONF_LIBDIR approach to the LIBDIR_${ABI} CFLAGS_
${ABI} approach.
The 2004.3 -> 2005.0 path will require some hack to make sure the users
have lib->lib64 instead of the other way around... if that's too much
trouble, maybe it'll be a 2005.0/lib profile that replaces 2004.3...
what do people think about this?
Also, once the portage patches neccessary for the multilib-dev/lib64
profile are released, I'll probably create 2005.0/multilib to let our
userbase start testing it (I'm guessing February/March). The best way
to help now is to use FEATURES=multilib-strict and report packages which
try installing 64bit libs in lib.
then next quarter hopefully we can goto multilib by default:
2005.0/multilib -> 2005.1
2005.0 -> 2005.1/compat
Also, the correct upgrade path will always be mentioned in the
'deprecated' file... so if in doubt, wait for yours to be deprecated or
just ask ;)
--Jeremy
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
