clone 497603 -1 severity 497603 wishlist tags 497603 - patch # A Provides: binutils would not satisfy versioned dependences, # and there are many out there. So I can’t see it happening soon. tags 497603 + wontfix
retitle -1 add binutils-multiarch-dev package severity -1 wishlist quit Hi Ian, Ian Wienand wrote: > 3) dpkg -i binutils-multiarch_2.19-1~exp2_i386.deb > > Tools are diverted to the multiarch versions > > 4) dpkg -i binutils-multiarch-dev_2.19-1~exp2_i386.deb > > Static libraries and dev library .so links point to multiarch versions > > r...@jj:/tmp# ls -l /usr/lib/libbfd* /usr/lib/libopcode* > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2546840 2008-12-24 13:57 > /usr/lib/libbfd-2.19-multiarch.so > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 942680 2008-11-30 05:03 /usr/lib/libbfd-2.19.so > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 15265334 2008-12-24 13:57 /usr/lib/libbfd.a > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 6818868 2008-12-24 13:57 /usr/lib/libbfd-single.a > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 14 2008-12-24 14:03 /usr/lib/libbfd-single.so -> > libbfd-2.19.so > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 2008-12-24 14:03 /usr/lib/libbfd.so -> > libbfd-2.19-multiarch.so [...] Are libbfd and libbfd-multiarch ABI-compatible? If so, great. I have some ideas about how we could take advantage of this. If not, I take it this change would require Build-Conflicts: binutils-multiarch-dev for the 21 binutils-dev rbuild-deps? > As to Peter's comment about multiarch providing binutils - it doesn't > create a universal assembler so it's not quite a complete 'provides'. Cloning the bug for sanity. Sorry for the long silence, Jonathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
