From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7TlU-0006w2-NA for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 06 Apr 2011 16:31:24 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p36ETICp019235; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 15:29:18 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 19202-01; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 15:29:14 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p36ET8eo019229 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 6 Apr 2011 15:29:11 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer In-Reply-To: References: <1302001365.24596.459.camel@rex> Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 07:29:03 -0700 Message-ID: <1302100143.22904.68.camel@rex> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: poky@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: Proposed Multilib Implementation Brainstorming X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 14:31:25 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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