On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 01:02:55PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> <<On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 01:09:49 +0000, Glen Barber <[email protected]> said:
> 
> >> I'm not convinced that it makes
> >> much sense to have all the different -lib32-* variants given the
> >> normal use case is runtime-only.
> 
> > For those who have no need for lib32 stuff, we do not want to enforce
> > its existence.
> 
> You may have missed my point: I was suggesting that the lib32 stuff be
> packed into fewer packages, because the places where it is needed are
> less likely to want fine-grained selection.  So just having a single
> package with all the "runtime" packages would be closer to what most
> people needed (and likewise for the "development" etc. libraries which
> are almost never useful).
> 

You're right, I did miss your point.

I see what you mean now.  It's not impossible to do, but will require
a bit of tweaking to the script that generates the metadata files.

Thank you for the suggestion.

Glen

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to