[aur-general] bin32-wine and related [WAS: trusted users business]

[Ng Oon-Ee]

On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 10:44 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 16/07/10 09:52, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> >
> > lib32 packages are just a hack to run i686 packages on x86_64. to call
> > arch a multilib we need first to have a multilib toolchain.
> >
> 
> Which is unlikely to ever happen...
> 
> I think all this lib32 stuff is crap.  Chroots are the way to go and are 
> so much cleaner.
> 
> Allan

I differ to your wisdom =). This sounds exactly like what I surmised
when I first searched out the running of 32-bit apps in 64-bit Arch.

In this spirit of "chroots are better" shouldn't it be made easier to
maintain a chroot? For example having a 'pacman32' or 'pacmanchroot'
package (would simply call pacman with user-configurable chroot
locations and has its own pacman.conf)? One of the more 'hassling'
things about maintaining my chroot is having to update each chroot
separately (yes I could script that, will get round to that someday).

Note that I'm not talking about automating chroot creation (I think Xyne
already has a package which does that by abusing the .install file), but
simplifying chroot maintenance. And before you say it, yes, patches
welcome =). Maybe in August I'll look into it.