From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23924 invoked by alias); 12 Jan 2015 08:42:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 23910 invoked by uid 89); 12 Jan 2015 08:42:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 12 Jan 2015 08:42:14 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t0C8gA6d008354 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 12 Jan 2015 03:42:10 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-51.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.51]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t0C8g6tj010073 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 12 Jan 2015 03:42:09 -0500 Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 08:42:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Yao Qi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Fix jit-reader.h for multilib Message-ID: <20150112084206.GA27188@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20150107173634.GA13295@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87387htths.fsf@codesourcery.com> <20150111131353.GA9107@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87iogcsp6m.fsf@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87iogcsp6m.fsf@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-01/txt/msg00293.txt.bz2 On Mon, 12 Jan 2015 03:33:37 +0100, Yao Qi wrote: > Jan Kratochvil writes: > > When we discuss it personally I do not think multilib should be applied to the > > GDB package as there is nothing like /usr/lib{,64}/libgdb.so. There is only > > /usr/bin/gdb and that has always just one arch on one system. So installing > > gdb.i686 and gdb.x86_64 simultaneously does not have any benefits / makes > > sense. But despites this I need it for Red Hat packaging so I am fine to also > > keep it just as a downstream patch. OTOH I guess other OS packagers may also > > face it so it may be easier for everyone to do it upstream. > > Is multi-lib safety a Fedora/Red Hat specific packaging rule? or do > other distributions need this too? I do not know how other distributions do that. Debian 'gdb' does not seem to ship jit-reader.h at all if I read Debian package listing correctly. For other libraries Debian ships the file like Fedora does: https://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/libgpm-dev/filelist /usr/include/gpm.h /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgpm.so https://packages.debian.org/sid/i386/libgpm-dev/filelist /usr/include/gpm.h /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgpm.so What would happen if /usr/include/gpm.h content differs between amd64 and i386 build? Fedora would refuse to install the second package due to conflicting file content (sure unless forced to do so). As I said this patch may not affect much/any other distros because * at least Debian does not ship jit-reader.h at all * other distros may not consider GDB as a multilib package Jan