FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-22-2012, 12:40 PM
Andrey Rahmatullin
 
Default zlib and biarch/triarch

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:14:49PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Just curious…
>
> I thought one is supposed to use Multi-Arch now, and that
> biarch/triarch can finally go away.
>
> Seeing the trouble broonie has with zlib, why are those
> packages still built anyway? Can’t they please go away?
What are you talking about?

--
WBR, wRAR
 
Old 05-22-2012, 12:47 PM
Cyril Brulebois
 
Default zlib and biarch/triarch

Andrey Rahmatullin <wrar@wrar.name> (22/05/2012):
> > Seeing the trouble broonie has with zlib, why are those
> > packages still built anyway? Can’t they please go away?
> What are you talking about?

Probably that:
http://packages.qa.debian.org/z/zlib.html
http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/z/zlib/current/changelog

Mraw,
KiBi.
 
Old 05-23-2012, 12:06 AM
Steve Langasek
 
Default zlib and biarch/triarch

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:14:49PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> I thought one is supposed to use Multi-Arch now, and that
> biarch/triarch can finally go away.

> Seeing the trouble broonie has with zlib, why are those
> packages still built anyway? Can’t they please go away?

zlib is rather low in the stack, so is going to be one of the last packages
to drop biarch support. Currently, ia32-libs, wine, lsb,
nvidia-graphics-drivers, and zsnes all depend on biarch zlib packages.

Of course, all of these packages appear to be specific to amd64, so I don't
know why Mark would be adding new biarch packages for s390. You should
probably ask him.

--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
 
Old 05-28-2012, 04:24 PM
Mark Brown
 
Default zlib and biarch/triarch

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 05:06:25PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:

> Of course, all of these packages appear to be specific to amd64, so I don't
> know why Mark would be adding new biarch packages for s390. You should
> probably ask him.

Ask the s390x folks, they asked for them. Though what on earth inspired
them to name the new architecture such that the old architecture name is
a substring of the new name is beyond me... As far as I can tell nobody
is really using the biarch packages on most architectures, it's a check
box feature for the architectures - a couple use them to build some of
the bootloaders but not many.

Aside from this sillyness with the s390x architecture name they're
generally zero effort so it's not a big deal.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120528162456.GD27049@sirena.org.uk">http://lists.debian.org/20120528162456.GD27049@sirena.org.uk
 
Old 05-28-2012, 04:26 PM
Mark Brown
 
Default zlib and biarch/triarch

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:14:49PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:

> Seeing the trouble broonie has with zlib, why are those
> packages still built anyway? Can???t they please go away?

The biarch packages really aren't any bother, the issue with s390x has
been having to jump through hoops due to the fail with using -m31 and
with the naming of the architecture.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120528162617.GE27049@sirena.org.uk">http://lists.debian.org/20120528162617.GE27049@sirena.org.uk
 
Old 05-28-2012, 05:01 PM
Cyril Brulebois
 
Default zlib and biarch/triarch

Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk> (28/05/2012):
> Ask the s390x folks, they asked for them. Though what on earth inspired
> them to name the new architecture such that the old architecture name is
> a substring of the new name is beyond me... As far as I can tell nobody
> is really using the biarch packages on most architectures, it's a check
> box feature for the architectures - a couple use them to build some of
> the bootloaders but not many.

Reminds me of arm/armel.

(I won't say a word on mips/mipsel and {*-,}{i386,amd64}. ;-))

Mraw,
KiBi.
 
Old 06-01-2012, 10:36 AM
Goswin von Brederlow
 
Default zlib and biarch/triarch

Thorsten Glaser <tg@mirbsd.de> writes:

> Just curious?
>
> I thought one is supposed to use Multi-Arch now, and that
> biarch/triarch can finally go away.
>
> Seeing the trouble broonie has with zlib, why are those
> packages still built anyway? Can??t they please go away?
>
> bye,
> //mirabilos

gcc still, and will remain doing so for some time, builds biarch
(multilib) and needs any number of Build-Depends.

MfG
Goswin


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87pq9jmi7u.fsf@frosties.localnet">http://lists.debian.org/87pq9jmi7u.fsf@frosties.localnet
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:46 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org