6.x from i386 to amd64

[Oliver Fromme]

Peter Jeremy wrote:
 > Mark Linimon wrote:
 > > - certain ports have i386 binaries (can't be fixed)
 > > - certain ports have i386 asm code (can be fixed if there is fallback
 > >   C code)
 > 
 > A partial solution to this is to get the i386 emulation and cross-
 > building into better shape.  If I really need a binary-only port
 > then I can build/run it in emulation mode.  This has bee discussed
 > previously.
 > 
 > IMHO, the FreeBSD/amd64 naming conventions make it much cleaner than
 > (eg) Solaris and Linux as long as you only want native-mode apps.
 > Unfortunately, it makes supporting i386 applications much harder
 > (bacause they need to understand they need to look in .../lib32
 > ISO .../lib).

Isn't someone working on porting variant symlinks over from
dragonfly?  I thought it was a SoC project or something
like that.  Using variant symlinks, the problem would be
easy to solve:

drwxr-xr-x   ...   lib32
drwxr-xr-x   ...   lib64
lrwxr-xr-x   ...   lib -> lib${ARCH_BITS}

ARCH_BITS would be set to "64" globally, and it would be
set to "32" for i386 applications.  Then every program
would find the correct libs automagically.

Best regards
   Oliver

PS:  For those who are not familiar with variant symlinks:
http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/cgi/web-man?command=ln
http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/cgi/web-man?command=varsym

-- 
Oliver Fromme,  secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing
Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd
Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author
and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way.

 > Can the denizens of this group enlighten me about what the
 > advantages of Python are, versus Perl ?
"python" is more likely to pass unharmed through your spelling
checker than "perl".
        -- An unknown poster and Fredrik Lundh