On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:08:56 -0400
Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 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
> /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.
That's exactly my concern. If /libhf is chosen for the dymamic linker path, but
it's not adopted by everyone else for libraries and other files, then at best
you'd have a symlink, at worst a dir with only one file inside.
> 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.
That case has only any chance of realization in a multiarch environment such as
Debian/Ubuntu. The rest won't be affected at all. And the dynamic linkers
-different filename of course- are the only libs that will be in /lib straight,
the rest will be in /lib/<triplet>. So there is no danger of any conflict, at
least not with libraries.
Konstantinos Margaritis <konstantinos.margari...@linaro.org>