On Thursday 05 April 2012 09:30:23 Konstantinos Margaritis wrote: > On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 07:09:46 -0500 Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > Fedora does use /lib64 on x86_64 I would personally prefer /libhfp but > > wouldn't object to /libhf though today we have f17 about to go beta > > and all of rawhide built using /lib > > One potential problem that is born from the /libhf suggestion is the > danger of having a new top level directory (/libhf) with only one file, > the dynamic linker. AFAIU it, no distro is currently willing to move away > from its existing scheme (/lib)
i don't think that's true. on an x86_64 system, the 64bit libs are in /lib64/. some distros tried to (pointlessly imo) resist and force 64bits into /lib/ when the native ABI was x86_64 (Gentoo included), but those are legacy imo, and afaik, they didn't break the ldso paths. so in a setup that only has hardfloat binaries, you'd have all the libs in /libhf/, not just the ldso. > Loic suggested a -IMHO- better solution: to change the dynamic linker > filename, not the dir, i.e. /lib/ld-linux-hf.so.3 (for this particular > case). the implication in supporting both hardfloat and softfloat simultaneously is that you'd could have them both installed. thus putting them both in /lib/ doesn't make much sense if you're still going to need /libhf/ to hold everything else. -mike
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.