On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:08:56 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> 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/<triplet>. So there is no danger of any conflict, at least not with libraries. -- Konstantinos Margaritis <konstantinos.margari...@linaro.org>
