On Sun, Jul 18, 2010, Steve Langasek wrote: > (BTW... if you want to run both armel and armhf under multiarch... which > package's libc gets to own ld.so? :P)
I understand ld.so can be wherever we want, since it's part of the executables, but I understand you're asking which architecture gets to own whatever /lib/ld-linux.so.2 is, since there's only one of them and we want to preserve compatibility with non-Debian binaries, right? On my amd64 system, /bin/rm points at /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 for an interpreter (*cough* /lib64) but on an armel system, it points at /lib/ld-linux.so.3, and on i386 system /lib/ld-linux.so.2 so perhaps we can expect 64-bits arches to have a suffix while 32-bits arches so that one could leave ld-linux to 32-bits arches and use the suffix for 64-bits arches? No idea whether there's a general rule for this -- Loïc Minier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100718194011.ga25...@bee.dooz.org
