On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 10:47 +0200, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > I think most embedded systems would only use one lib. To take your > lib/lib64 example: > If I am developing for an embedded system I know whether it will run > as 32 or 64 bit, so there is no need to have both.
I agree that this is the most common usecase and that remains unchanged. > multilib has its merits when it comes to supporting multiple hardware systems. > However as in the embedded world one is typically targeting a specific > hardware configuration. > (actually I don't recall having seen requests for multilib on the ML > before, although I could have missed it). These have been requests I've received verbally in general but you'll see from the replies on the mailing list, Montavista is interested, Koen is as are a number of others. > Also I'm somewhat worried by the actual complexity this adds (to the > build process and the recipes, and timewise probably also to the > bootstrap process as additional packages have to be built). > > Not sure if that is a desirable route forward, but if we (we as in OE > members + developers) feel that OE should go that way, I would > sugggest to have a way to opt-in or opt-out Multilib will be opt-in. Things will operate just as they do today unless you specify you want a multilib configuration. Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core