On 07/28/2011 08:41 AM, Genes MailLists wrote: > On 07/28/2011 07:53 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote: >> On 07/28/2011 12:46 PM, Genes MailLists wrote: > >>> This is a good point. Especially when you start on a 64 bit box and >>> login to a 32 bit (or other arch) - bin now makes now sense at all. You >>> need arch specific bins (bin, bin64 etc). >> >> Currently Fedora only separates out the /lib* directories in multilib >> installations - you'll find a mix of 32 and 64 bit binaries in the system >> binary >> paths on these systems. >> > > which is fine for a 'system' which is 64 bit and may support 32 bit as > well - its not fine for a 'user' who logs in to a 32 bit machine from a > 64 bit machine and now his binaries wont work.
In the same way as an NFS mounted /usr/local/bin which only had 64 bit binaries would not be a lot of use on a 32 bit machine. It can be dealth with of course - what I've seen in this case, is either 2 different mounts or making both available and having the PATH adjust as needed. Add to that different architectures and the PATH way gets nasty fast. My preference is for the machine to mount the right one under /usr/local (or /usr/share or whatever. For user level .local/bin[64] there are different approaches I imagine - for one its not hard to adjust the PATH in this case based on uname -m or similar. However, having .local/bin under NFS home is a more complicated case for sure and probably is just plain wrong without some architecture recognition - so the "standard" looks ill conceived from this regard. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
