Fighting the i386 plague

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 11:23:27AM -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 January 2007 08:29, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > There's no reason that they should. With careful packaging it's possible
> > to have libraries (i.e. the only binaries that need to be multilib'd)
> > in separate packages.
> 
> So lets see some sustainable examples.

OpenIPMI (this one has packaging bugs, like .pc file(s) in -libs),
audit, bind, file and so on. Curiously enough, all of these have
static libs packaged in -devel, which - according to current packaging
guidelines - is a review blocker.

Regards,

-- 
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <rathann*at*icm.edu.pl>
Interdisciplinary Centre for Mathematical and Computational Modelling
Warsaw University  |  http://www.icm.edu.pl  |  tel. +48 (22) 5540810