On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 02:25 +0300, Ionuț Bîru wrote: > On 07/16/2010 02:15 AM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 00:12 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > >>> > >> I would be very delighted to see bin32-wine moving into community. If > >> you can package all the lib32 packages it depends on you will a) be able > >> to do that b) have some packages that make good community candidates > >> anyway (lib32 stuff). Also, why can't you do it while on vacation? > >> Surely you have your SSH tunnel, right? :) > >> > >> -- Lord Sven-Hendrik "Svenstaro" Haase > > > > I second the bin32-wine thing =). For it to be useful though I think > > lib32-all-graphic-drivers need to be available? > > > > no. only lib32-libgl and lib32-nvidia-utils, which already are in > community. > > lets stick in the future in $subject and start another thread if you > feel you need to add something about packaging :D >
Your wish is my command. Okay now that I have your answer I understand my assumptions were mistaken, only the libgl/nvidia-utils packages are 'app-facing' in that sense. A nagging question that I've been having in the back of my mind, how similar is Arch's lib32 stuff with the multi-lib stuff other distros (random example Ubuntu since that's my previous experience) do. When I first started using Arch I set a chroot up for my wine/skype/google-earth on the understanding that lib32 would always be 'unofficial', but recently I've seen more lib32 packages making it to [community]. Would lib32 make Arch multi-lib, then?
