Bug 198862
| Summary: | gimp present for 32bit and 64bit -- why? | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Nils Philippsen <nphilipp> | ||||
| Component: | distribution | Assignee: | Bill Nottingham <notting> | ||||
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Bill Nottingham <notting> | ||||
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||
| Priority: | medium | ||||||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | dcantrell, rvokal | ||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened | ||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||
| Hardware: | x86_64 | ||||||
| OS: | Linux | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
| Last Closed: | 2006-07-18 13:27:00 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||
| Embargoed: | |||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
Nils Philippsen
2006-07-14 09:38:28 UTC
Created attachment 132421 [details]
screenshot of the repo containing both arches
version is rather 2.2.12-1.1.fc6 (not that it matters much) It includes a -devel package; we ship all devel for multiarch. The gimp-devel package is only for developing plug-ins and extensions for the existing gimp binary package. The 32bit gimp package is only present on x86_64 because the 32bit gimp-devel package requires it, the latter is only required if you need to build stuff for the former. Please exclude 32bit gimp-devel on x86_64, on the one hand this saves more than 10MB on the media, on the other this saves me the hassle to unnecessarily split off (build-time generated) gimp documentation to avoid multiarch file conflicts. I don't know that excluding particular -devel packages is feasible. Jesse? Will there not be a broken dep then, gimp-devel on gimp? I can exlude a package, but I'd much rather not have broken deps in the system. I'm not comfortable with that. Jesse, it's both 32bit gimp-devel and 32bit gimp that should be excluded, see above why. Up to FC5, only 64bit versions of these packages have been present, with no broken deps that I know of. If we can't, rather than split off the docs, splitting off the gimp libs would probably be simpler. Hmm, it's probably not only the docs, but the binaries as well (e.g. /usr/bin/gimp-2.2). While we could work around the multilib problem by splitting off libraries, I think there shouldn't be a multilib problem at all -- gimp, its libraries and accompanying devel files should only be present for one architecture. In a multi-lib env, the base arch is preferred for the bin files (/usr/bin/gimp-2.2), the devel packages would be the same, and you'd get lib and lib64 versions of the libraries. What if you wanted to build 32bit plugins on your 64bit box? Thats WHY we provide multilib. Hmm, I had the impression that we provided multilib so people could run 3rd party 32bit software on their 64bit systems. I haven't heard yet that we support building 32bit software on 64bit without using a 32bit buildroot -- at least we haven't done so in the past (beehive) and brew won't be much different I presume. Our build system doesn't support it, but we support it for our users when they install the system. Hmm, I wasn't aware of that (and couldn't find any statements on it on the various websites), but if that's how we want to spend space on the media... ;-). Anyway, I'll only include the gimptool for the "primary" architecture, if people want to build for the secondary one, they'll have to use pkg-config instead. |