On 01/06/2017 08:14 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: [snip]
Much of what I would have said has been said by Oron (some of this I've said in earlier parts of this thread, as well). But the bigger thing is that it makes it much easier to bootstrap new architectures for Fedora, too, as we can start from libraries and build up to applications relatively easily. It doesn't completely solve the issue, as there would still be some conflicts, but it makes it a lot less challenging. Enabling things like being able to do test and development with arbitrary architectures would be a huge boon, as well.
[snip]
Yes, beyond Oron's focus on embedded development the general reality is that it is a plain useful mechanism for using OS+architecture to do work on a different OS+architecture. We could really have used something like this for the armhfp bootstrap, or the aarch64 bootstrap, or the ppc64le bootstrap. Add in the judicious use of qemu as the suse team does and making something new is considerably less hard. X32, ilp32, mips, etc all face chicken-and-egg problems in bootstrap that this simplifies. Who knows what will be next?
Multilib is likewise useful for backward compatibility across major releases and distributions. If third party software vendors only had to qualify their software on one release of one distribution with the expectation that it would run on all because the dynamic libraries were available on all it would be a real win for Linux as a whole. The fact we don't have that is part of what is driving container adoption.
-- Brendan Conoboy / RHEL Development Coordinator / Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
