On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 11:40, Steve McIntyre <st...@einval.com> wrote: > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 10:49:32AM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > >On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 09:40, Steve McIntyre <st...@einval.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 07:40:00AM +0200, Ansgar wrote: > >> > > >> >The core issue as I see it is as follows: > >> > > >> >- Debian has decided to support only merged-/usr, including possibly > >> > moving /bin/sh to /usr/bin/sh or using /usr/lib*/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 > >> > as the interpreter in binaries. > >> > >> WTF? *Nobody* has been talking about breaking ABI like this, that I've > >> seen. The interpreter must *not* be changed willy-nilly. > > > >Nothing's happening 'willy-nilly'. We are discussing a bunch of > >seemingly crazy options, as in, "what would _actually_ explode if we > >do this or do that?", on this very d-devel thread. I posted a longer > >version here some days ago: > > > >https://lists.debian.org/debian-gcc/2023/05/msg00030.html > > Oh holy fuck. > > You're talking about changing ABI by doing this. That *is* utterly > crazy. No.
It's a thought experiment on a mailing list. If we can't even have those anymore, something went very wrong somewhere. You seem to be aware of things that wouldn't work anymore (I think?). If you have a couple of minutes to spare, may I please ask you to reply to that thread with such examples? I am genuinely interested in understanding and talking about it. Thank you. Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
