On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 12:51:01AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: >On Wednesday 14 November 2012 22:49:06 Jon Masters wrote: >> On 09/17/2012 06:24 AM, Wookey wrote: >> > The upstream patches have used the existing (poor man's >> > multiarch) paths: >> > /lib64 >> > /usr/lib64 >> > in order to make them fit in with existing upstream convention. >> >> I originally wanted to use /lib, but we're going to switch to /lib64 for >> consistency with other 64-bit architectures, and so on. I am concerned >> that we agree on the linker, but not on other library paths. Will Debian >> and Ubuntu consider a package that includes /lib64 "compatibility" >> symlinks so that non-multiarch systems can share code with multi-arch >> ones? We don't need to break this :) > >in terms of binary compatibility, i don't think paths beyond the ldso matter. >when glibc is configured, you give it the lib paths to use, and then at >runtime >you can add more stuff to /etc/ld.so.conf. that means distros can use >whatever >conventions they want as the ldso interp gates it all, and compiled ELF >applications only have that ldso path encoded in them.
Mostly yes, but consider apps which include plugins too. :-/ Cheers, -- Steve McIntyre [email protected] <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs _______________________________________________ cross-distro mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-distro
