I think we should start a campaign for converting the lib32 and bit32 pkgs to new multilib compliant format. So instead if downloading the 32bit version from the i686 repos build the package from source whit -m32 and gcc-multilib.
On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 22:46 +0200, jesse jaara wrote:
I think we should start a campaign for converting the lib32 and bit32 pkgs to new multilib compliant format. So instead if downloading the 32bit version from the i686 repos build the package from source whit -m32 and gcc-multilib.
Is there a need for a campaign? Just leave a message on the comments.
There are 176 lib32 and 68 bin32 pkgs in aur , who wants to write comment on each. Well most of bin32 are binary only pkgs but still wouldn't it be easyer to have one message to inform all current maintainers of such a pkg and also make sure that the new pkg will be created on same manner?
2010/11/14 Ng Oon-Ee ngoonee@gmail.com
On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 22:46 +0200, jesse jaara wrote:
I think we should start a campaign for converting the lib32 and bit32 pkgs to new multilib compliant format. So instead if downloading the 32bit version from the i686 repos build the package from source whit -m32 and gcc-multilib.
Is there a need for a campaign? Just leave a message on the comments.
On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 22:46 +0200, jesse jaara wrote:
I think we should start a campaign for converting the lib32 and bit32 pkgs to new multilib compliant format. So instead if downloading the 32bit version from the i686 repos build the package from source whit -m32 and gcc-multilib.
I think the multilib repo was created with that as the target, so you needn't worry.
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org