On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 5:49 AM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote: > On 08.12.2017 12:35, Joe Orton wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 10:06:22AM -0600, William A Rowe Jr wrote: >>> They trust the compiler to do the right things, so there is no special >>> sauce added to apr-config. Respective build flags land in >>> /usr/lib/apr-1/build/ >>> /usr/lib64/apr-1/build/ >> We do have to hack /usr/bin/apr-1-config to do: >> >> CPPFLAGS=`pkg-config --variable=CPPFLAGS apr-1` >> >> because that file has to be identical across both 32- and 64-bit builds. >> Otherwise we get RPM file conflicts when trying to install both i686 and >> x86_64 apr-devel at the same time. >> >> Because there is no way to actually thread the choice of arch through >> pkg-config and the myriad /usr/bin/*-config files, this stuff is a gross >> hack, isn't really widely used in practice, and I don't see much point >> in trying to solve "properly". It's quite likely 32-bit arches will all >> be dead by the time we managed it :)
Considering I might have parallel libs for Intel and ARM and Power at this point, lib/ and lib64/ is sort of an underwhelming hack. But the autogunk arch cross-compile model for lib/ is helpful. > Ooh, I'm getting a 64-bit RPi? Sounds fabulous. :) If you gain a RPi 3, you have one. You're just probably running a 32-bit OS... unless you want to spin up a 64-bit kernel for ARMv8. With 1GB and limited 'disk', I'd avoid spinning a dual-arch kernel. How 32 vs 64 libs are managed is an architecture choice, Michael would probably want to follow IBM's example in the case of AIX.
