SELF: Anatomy of an (alleged) failure
Posted Jun 24, 2010 23:36 UTC (Thu) by Tet
In reply to: SELF: Anatomy of an (alleged) failure
Parent article: SELF: Anatomy of an (alleged) failure
You know, somewhere along that line, you're dropping a 2 or 3 gigabyte binary file on my machine just to run Mozilla?
Bah. I really don't see a good case for FatELF.
Yeesh. Everyone is bringing up countless examples of where FatELF could be abused and claiming that it's therefore useless. But no one has mentioned that FatELF solves some very real problems, problems that I encounter on a fairly regular basis. Here's a hint: if you don't want to use fat binaries, then don't. I'll guarantee you that even if it were included upstream, Fedora/Debian/OpenSUSE/Ubuntu etc would continue to release architecture specific images. But for some of us, that's not good enough, and FatELF is one solution to the problem. If people want to suggest others, I'm all ears...
to post comments)