linux- ports on amd64

[Conrad J. Sabatier]

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 11:28:59 -0700, Astrodog <astrodog at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 9, 2005 10:37 AM, Mikhail Teterin <mi at aldan.algebra.com> wrote:
> > Hello!
> > 
> > linux_base-8 installed without a hitch, but linux-gtk2 and
> > its dependencies kept complaining about amd64. I had to patch
> > them all with
> > 
> > -ONLY_FOR_ARCHS=        i386
> > +ONLY_FOR_ARCHS=        i386 amd64
> > 
> > and rename distinfo.i386 back into distinfo for the time being.
> > linux-jpeg was a special case, requiring the following patch:
> > 
> > -RPM_SET=       libjpeg-6b-15.${MACHINE_ARCH}.rpm
> > +RPM_SET=       libjpeg-6b-15.${MACHINE_ARCH:S/amd64/i386/}.rpm
> > 
> > As a result linux-firefox installed and is usable.
> > 
> > Is this problem just an oversight or was there a conscientious
> > decision to limit these ports to i386, when amd64 is also perfectly
> > capable to use them?
> > 
> >         -mi
> 
> This is an issue I'm currently trying to come up with a more systemic
> solution for. It gets uglier once you have system, and compat rpms.

I'm not sure what you mean here.  "System" and "compat" rpms???

> Anyone have any thoughts on a "long term" solution for this?

I agree that we need some sort of over-arching approach, rather than a
piecemeal, port-by-port "solution".  Of course, there are bound to be
some ports that will prove to be resistant to such a generalized
approach, but hopefully, these will prove to be in the minority.

Maybe something along the lines of a bsd.linux.mk file?

-- 
Conrad J. Sabatier <conrads at cox.net> -- "In Unix veritas"