On Dienstag, 10. Dezember 2019, 16:21:49 CET Guillaume Gardet wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Adrian Schröter <[email protected]>
> > Sent: 07 December 2019 12:46
> > To: openSUSE ARM ML ([email protected]) <opensuse-
> > [email protected]>
> > Subject: [opensuse-arm] arm 32bit vs arm 32bit
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was going to add 32bit package configs to repackage armv7hl libs for 
> > aarch64
> > installations (for personal need, samsung binary only printer driver)
> >
> > However, I noticed that armv7hl 32bit userland would conflict with 
> > aarch64_ilp32
> > definitions.
> >
> > Was there already any discussion how a mixed arch installation should look 
> > alike?
> >
> > My proposal would be (for a aarch64 installation):
> >
> >  armv[567]* libs should be installed in /lib (and /usr/lib) via 
> > *-32bit*.aarch64.rpm
> > /lib to stay compatible with armv[567] installations.
> >
> >  aarch64_ilp32 libs should be installed in /lib-ilp32 via 
> > *-ilp32*.aarch64.rpm
> > current config seems to put these in -32bit packages, what seems to be 
> > wrong to
> > me.
> >
> >  Do we also need to take care about aarch32?
> >
> > any opinion about this?
> 
> AFAIK, you cannot use armv7 libs/bins as is on arm64 systems.

I am doing it already ;)

Just with manual extracted libs put into /lib, but that is what I like to clean 
up 
a bit...

raspi4:~/uld # file arm/rastertospl
arm/rastertospl: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, EABI5 version 1 (SYSV), 
dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.3, for GNU/Linux 2.6.18, 
stripped
raspi4:~/uld # ./arm/rastertospl
INFO: Usage: rastertospl job-id user title copies options [file]
ERROR: Wrong number of arguments
raspi4:~/uld # uname -m
aarch64


-- 

Adrian Schroeter <[email protected]>
Build Infrastructure Project Manager

SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH,  Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany
(HRB 247165, AG München), Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to