Re: [gentoo-amd64] lib = 32, lib64 = 64 is better

2005-02-22 Thread Barry . Schwartz
Antoine Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2005-02-21 at 19:18 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > Antoine Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Bearing in mind that I have not been confronted to any of these issues, > > > I can't think of a reason why a piece of software should rely o

Re: [gentoo-amd64] lib = 32, lib64 = 64 is better

2005-02-22 Thread Simon Stelling
Hi, > lib = 32, lib64 = 64 is better This is our final goal for 2005.1 IIRC. To catch programs that put their 64bit-libraries into lib, you can stick multilib-strict in your FEATURES, but don't expect your system working for now. I already created a little template to report multilib-strict bugs

Re: [gentoo-amd64] lib = 32, lib64 = 64 is better

2005-02-22 Thread Antoine Martin
On Mon, 2005-02-21 at 19:18 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Antoine Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Bearing in mind that I have not been confronted to any of these issues, > > I can't think of a reason why a piece of software should rely on > > hard-coded paths. > > By hard-coded do you me

Re: [gentoo-amd64] lib = 32, lib64 = 64 is better

2005-02-21 Thread Barry . Schwartz
Antoine Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bearing in mind that I have not been confronted to any of these issues, > I can't think of a reason why a piece of software should rely on > hard-coded paths. By hard-coded do you mean to exclude software that sets paths at compile time, or do you mean r

Re: [gentoo-amd64] lib = 32, lib64 = 64 is better

2005-02-21 Thread Antoine Martin
On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 00:26 +, Peter Humphrey wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I have what I consider the best evidence yet that lib being the 32-bit > > area is better. > > [...] > > So the debate is between practical considerations such as you describe, on > the one hand, and the plai

Re: [gentoo-amd64] lib = 32, lib64 = 64 is better

2005-02-21 Thread Barry . Schwartz
Peter Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So the debate is between practical considerations such as you describe, on > the one hand, and the plain logical conclusion that, on the amd64 > platform, /lib is the natural place for 64-bit libraries, the 32-bit ones > being of the nature of a kludge

Re: [gentoo-amd64] lib = 32, lib64 = 64 is better

2005-02-21 Thread Peter Humphrey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have what I consider the best evidence yet that lib being the 32-bit > area is better. [...] So the debate is between practical considerations such as you describe, on the one hand, and the plain logical conclusion that, on the amd64 platform, /lib is the natural pl

[gentoo-amd64] lib = 32, lib64 = 64 is better

2005-02-21 Thread Barry . Schwartz
I have what I consider the best evidence yet that lib being the 32-bit area is better. I just finished adding Imlib2 support to a 32-bit program, working in my chroot. I am used to running this program in my 64-bit environment, but the Imlib2 support didn't work there. Imlib2 uses plug-ins for