On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 10:44 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > On 16/07/10 09:52, Ionuț Bîru wrote: > > > > lib32 packages are just a hack to run i686 packages on x86_64. to call > > arch a multilib we need first to have a multilib toolchain. > > > > Which is unlikely to ever happen... > > I think all this lib32 stuff is crap. Chroots are the way to go and are > so much cleaner. > > Allan
I differ to your wisdom =). This sounds exactly like what I surmised when I first searched out the running of 32-bit apps in 64-bit Arch. In this spirit of "chroots are better" shouldn't it be made easier to maintain a chroot? For example having a 'pacman32' or 'pacmanchroot' package (would simply call pacman with user-configurable chroot locations and has its own pacman.conf)? One of the more 'hassling' things about maintaining my chroot is having to update each chroot separately (yes I could script that, will get round to that someday). Note that I'm not talking about automating chroot creation (I think Xyne already has a package which does that by abusing the .install file), but simplifying chroot maintenance. And before you say it, yes, patches welcome =). Maybe in August I'll look into it.
