On 04/06/2011 01:47 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > 2011/4/5 Richard Purdie <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org>: > > [...] >> >> Does this make sense to everyone, are there any questions/ objections/ >> concerns/ things I've missed? > > 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.
What about the case of new 64bit hardware and legacy software that's still 32bit? This is a problem that embedded systems have and OE needs to support > 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). You missed it :) Roman Khimov posted a very basic thing years ago for dealing with the x86/x86_64 problem. > 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). I agree, we do need to be careful to make sure the non-multilib case isn't made more difficult by all of this. -- Tom Rini Mentor Graphics Corporation _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core