From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4496 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2012 15:24:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 4475 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Apr 2012 15:24:32 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-wi0-f171.google.com (HELO mail-wi0-f171.google.com) (209.85.212.171) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 15:24:20 +0000 Received: by wibhj13 with SMTP id hj13so1277962wib.12 for ; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:24:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :organization:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=ZYqovSK+YmKiK/CPJf3kfnsRcLnkotppDR9yeaN4mtU=; b=eyu5H3X4R4CGIQuq/LGXCE10afIug5R+Cafp9RSHZ1Nfy+WOcgwTvQR0IretN9KWkI fvRv/pNYkZ+3GxYLOP7BlCbVyvDTuRVHI76RkfmVXTZt3rhKZUk9GVSVyGbqraOk+Bbi 5G6R2QhEahK0NXK+4JTVCtQknIBXIJg/o5nebZbFtBev8aKUXvAHbysT+jLYrNK8FcbM YzeP0Q/nv7DWPjlPkHuPTJV7DjbczWCeh8IunvjlEjaMChPwg0Ns+0wDrAzqpkkLG59a N/NZv0iX43bxbM7rnJzh4vyyQF4aXan5z4g8nAwck7MmQga9sd0GPjDa/at1cUPVLnmJ G8CA== Received: by 10.180.104.137 with SMTP id ge9mr5785001wib.20.1333639458692; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:24:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from meriadoc.lan (ppp-94-64-44-12.home.otenet.gr. [94.64.44.12]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w10sm18265040wiy.3.2012.04.05.08.24.16 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:24:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 15:24:00 -0000 From: Konstantinos Margaritis To: Mike Frysinger Cc: cross-distro@lists.linaro.org, Dennis Gilmore , libc-ports@sourceware.org, "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , Richard Earnshaw , "Joseph S. Myers" Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: Use different linker path for hardfloat ABI Message-Id: <20120405182415.8aaa8b25181e0b46b5f501ef@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <201204051108.58683.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <20120329193401.GA14860@dannf.org> <20120404070946.071e7c45@pegasus.ausil.us> <20120405163023.561469dca6619e31cf7a1d9e@linaro.org> <201204051108.58683.vapier@gentoo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnGnGdZC8QecWhTl8ZLN/TDPX2aBq5ndzL+bgNMC7buxI9tdBbVjIc7d7k+WV0vxuR186fq Mailing-List: contact libc-ports-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-ports-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00013.txt.bz2 On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:08:56 -0400 Mike Frysinger 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 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. 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/. So there is no danger of any conflict, at least not with libraries. -- Konstantinos Margaritis