Johnny Hughes wrote:
<snip>
First thing is that building on x86_64 is quite a PITA.
You will need to either use mock with the appropriate configuration file
or you will need to create a build machine that has only x86_64 RPMS
(otherwise you will either try (and fail) to link to i386 libraries ...
or if you have enough i386 software actually installed (binutils,
libgcc, glibc and glibc-devel) then you will actually link against i386
libraries).
Hi,
I've seen several posts like Johnny's here saying that i386 libs are
preferentially linked instead of x86_64 libs on x86_64 systems.
However I can't reproduce this, and seem to observe the opposite. See:
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2008-March/095576.html
Also, on a centos5 x86_64 machine ldd --verbose has:
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-redhat-linux/lib64");
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64"); SEARCH_DIR("/lib64");
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64"); SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-redhat-linux/lib");
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64"); SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib");
SEARCH_DIR("/lib"); SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");
which I understand as giving higher priority to x86_64 libs?
In the thread concerning snmppd linked above, the problem seemed to be
caused by the Makefile, which specified -L/usr/lib hence imposing the
highest priority for i386 libs.
I guess either I'm missing / misunderstanding something, or there's a
widespread use of inappropriate -L directives in makefiles, maybe
autogenerated ones eg by automake? In which case it's an automake bug
and should be reported.
thanks,
Nicolas
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
