On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 10:27:43 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 11:00:37PM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 October 2006 19:28, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
> > Should this be included by default for x86_64 ?
> > user joe won't figure it out like this.
>
> Absolutely not. An end user's multilib capable machine + OS should install
> the multilib software by default. An end user shouldn't have to figure out
> how to add it after the fact. It should Just Work(tm) for the user. There
> should be no problem with the x86_64 and i386 packages being installed. If
> there are, like multilib file conflicts, we fix them.
Is it true for Extras? I haven't seen anything like a push for multilib
in extras, for example there is nothing in the guidelines, nor something
reporting the conflicts. Did I miss something?
We've talked about it a few weeks ago. Currently, only Wine i386 plus its
dependencies are copied into the x86_64 repository. With every push of new
packages, updates of packages in the dependency chain are recognised and
are distributed to the multi-lib repositories automatically, too.
As soon as the FC-6 branch is available, we can switch a few bits for the
next "development" tree of Extras and copy all *-devel packages and their
dependencies, too. Additional work will be needed as conflicts are found
and as we find packages we want to add to the white-list and black-list of
what shall become multi-lib capable or not.