-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 25 April 2003 19:36, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> You know this will probably require modifications in *thousands* of
> packages ?
Yes, I fully understand the impact. I've done it for half the packages
in something similar to Red Hat 9 on s390x and we're in the currently
building a minimal sid with /lib64 on s390x.
Experience shows that around 50% of the packages don't need any
changes and 30% need trivial changes, e.g. updating the libtool
and autoconf files. Since almost all binary packages from i386 can
be used on amd64 without much performance impact, it is no
problem if less important packages don't get ported for a long
time.
> I'm afraid I'm missing the point here : our other 64-bits arches don't
> use /lib64, and they aren't in bad shape. What incompatibilities would
> it bring to use our plain, good old /lib for x86-64 as well ?
- Third-party amd64 packages. All of them.
- i386 drop-in compatibility (you'd need to use a chroot)
- LSB certification
The existing 64 bit architectures (alpha and ia64) don't have a native
32 bit ABI, although they are both capable of running i386 binaries
in an emulation mode with a significant performance loss.
AFAIK, /lib64 is standardized for at least amd64, s390x, sparc64 and
ppc64. mips64 and hppa and should probably use it as well, but I'm not
sure about those.
Arnd <><
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+qdqI5t5GS2LDRf4RAnl3AJoCdGJ3mTF+aA4zRffDm6e25kPrMACeIOuB
HHGLD8W0HExMDfjWxsF5rqM=
=/rpC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
