This is the mail archive of the
libc-ports@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the libc-ports project.
Re: Phone call (was Re: Armhf dynamic linker path)
- From: Paulo César Pereira de Andrade <paulo dot cesar dot pereira dot de dot andrade at gmail dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Michael Hope <michael dot hope at linaro dot org>, Steve McIntyre <steve dot mcintyre at linaro dot org>, cross-distro at lists dot linaro dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Adam Conrad <adconrad at debian dot org>, libc-ports at sourceware dot org, linaro-toolchain at lists dot linaro dot org, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 17:32:43 -0300
- Subject: Re: Phone call (was Re: Armhf dynamic linker path)
- References: <20120331103406.GA17776@einval.com> <201204100019.13472.vapier@gentoo.org> <4F83B5AD.3010302@redhat.com> <201204100033.08853.vapier@gentoo.org> <4F83B939.10205@redhat.com> <4F84AC96.6020500@redhat.com> <20120411010608.GC25263@einval.com> <20120411223755.GD25263@einval.com> <CANLjY-k73dZJmE9YOvy-fG3rH_L-Ycz6tt4tsV7CKo3t5phSoA@mail.gmail.com> <20120412060523.GI16117@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com>
Em 12 de abril de 2012 03:05, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> escreveu:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:22:13AM +1200, Michael Hope wrote:
>> All good. ?My vote is for /lib/ld-arm-linux-gnueabihf.so.3 as it:
>
> The directory should be /libhf/ or /libhfp/ for that for consistency
> with all the other architectures. ?Note e.g. x86_64 dynamic linker
> is /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, not /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2.
> For distros that choose to multilib softfp vs. hardfp all the hardfp
> libraries would go into the usual */lib{qual} paths (for qual hf resp.
> hfp), for others /libhf can be a symlink to /lib or for those doing
> multiarch stuff can be a symlink to the multiarch location of the thing.
I would feel a bit better with a commitment for multilib if using /libhf,
but really just to make users life easier. Providing the infrastructure
(by having multilib packages) is asking for it to be used. In the skype
example, if multilib is supported by all distros, skype may as well
provide only an armv5te software float build for linux arm.
This is the reason, for example, to install skype in my x86_64
computer I need to install 32 bit qt, alsa, X11 libraries, etc to be
able to install x86 skype.
> I'm fine with arm and hf (resp. hfp) being mentioned in the name of
> the dynamic linker, but IMNSHO having there gnu and eabi strings
> is an overkill - why mention gnu there, when all the other
> architectures which also have GNU libc dynamic linkers don't? ?That
> part is implicit. ?And, EABI is implied by so.3, softfp dynamic linker
> for EABI is /lib/ld-linux.so.3 while softfp dynamic linker for the old
> ABI is /lib/ld-linux.so.2.
>
> ? ? ? ?Jakub
Paulo