On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 00:58:07 +0300, Valery Ushakov wrote: > /emul/$foo is a magic place for emulations, the kernel arranges for > lookups under /emul/$foo before lookups upder the normal root, etc. > So when the proposed wording suggests to put stuff under /emul/bsdos > that is NOT magic, that is potentially very confusing. Yes, I know > it's also mentioned in the old version (and now that I've noticed, I'm > not happy about it), but the new text suggests to add symlinks from > /shlib to /emul/bsdos/shlib and to me that looks like a very confusing > setup. > > So ideally the wording should explain that bsdos does NOT have a magic > /emul/$foo root like other emulations as it's COMPAT_NOMID, not > COMPAT_BSDOS, and the binaries run under COMPAT_NOMID get their files > looked up in the normal root namespace, so you have to have a real > /shlib in you file system, whatever that is, a directory or a symlink > to elsewhere. /emul/bsdos/shlib might be not that bad a choice for > $elsewhere, but then the man page has to be super-clear that this is > just to follow the convention and there's no magic in that choice, as > /emul prefix might imply.
This actually prompted me to look around I guess we need to update man pages for ldconfig(8) and ld.so.conf(5) b/c from a quick look ldconfig would actually look under /emul/aout for both the config and the libraries and that's not mentioned in the man pages. -uwe
