| Summary: | media-libs/libspng-0.7.4 add missing multilib and other platforms | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Jon Daniel <joneqdaniel> |
| Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Alfred Wingate <parona> |
| Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | eschwartz, joneqdaniel, parona, proxy-maint |
| Priority: | Normal | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Attachments: |
Multilib support for media-libs/libspng
updated with git and multilib |
||
|
Description
Jon Daniel
2025-01-26 15:37:37 UTC
Created attachment 917559 [details]
Multilib support for media-libs/libspng
Adds only one other architecture right now ~x86
Are there consumers for this? In tree or outside the tree? For keywords that gets handled by the arch team. Ideally there would be users requiring that as well. Just because its multilib doesn't mean it needs an x86 keyword. The following packages depend on libspng: x11-wm/xpra games-emulation/dolphin media-libs/vips https://github.com/dkfans/keeperfx There are lots of other arches to be added also git I mean packages which need multilib from libspng. This was added to gentoo for dolphin which isn't multilib. For keywords specially: For packages in gentoo with libspng support disabled. The right way to handle missing keywords would be to add new revisions with libspng in depends and missing keywords dropped. Then a create rekeywording requests for the packages so that libspng gets it as well. We also generally only multilib something if something (in-tree or significant outside) needs it. Could you explain why these package need multilib? Just because you can doesn't mean you should. https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?email1=joneqdaniel%40gmail.com&emailassigned_to1=1&emailreporter1=1&emailtype1=substring&list_id=7364681&order=Importance&query_format=advanced&resolution=---&resolution=FIXED&resolution=INVALID&resolution=WONTFIX&resolution=LATER&resolution=REMIND&resolution=DUPLICATE&resolution=WORKSFORME&resolution=CANTFIX&resolution=NEEDINFO&resolution=TEST-REQUEST&short_desc=add%20multilib&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr Obviously every package should support multilib if it is available on 32/64bit platforms so one is able to use both 32 and 64 bit versions of the library package. The packages are outdated and should be updated to support multilib. I don't understand why you even ask why the support is needed. Packages not providing multilib support are obviously outdated and keep users from using both 32/64 bit version of the packages. Created attachment 917855 [details]
updated with git and multilib
(In reply to Jon Daniel from comment #8) > Obviously every package should support multilib if it is available on > 32/64bit platforms so one is able to use both 32 and 64 bit versions of the > library package. The packages are outdated and should be updated to support > multilib. > I don't understand why you even ask why the support is needed. > Packages not providing multilib support are obviously outdated and keep > users from using both 32/64 bit version of the packages. https://bugs.gentoo.org/948862#c3 This ticket is invalid by policy, please discuss it in exactly one location. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 948862 *** |
