Re: Loader Magic

[Jerry Haltom <jhaltom@feedbackplusinc.com>]

Oh and here's why I was thinking this was a better idea:

Down the road, probably many years... or maybe on some strange arch
Debian wants to support... we may have stuff like, oh I dunno, a 128 bit
or 256 bit CPU. :) Or maybe 56 bit. Who knows. We can't predict the
future. What if this CPU runs all the possible binaries? Well we'll have
stuff like:

/lib32 /lib64 /lib128 /lib256 /lib56, onwards. One system might call
lib64 /lib, while another might have /lib32 as lib. Who knows. It gets
weird, and a bit unclean.

But if every .so was clearly labeled what arch/abi it worked with...
there would never be a problem. Looking for a x86_64, load it. Looking
for x86, load it. Any combination of the above archs can coexist.

I worry about embedding all this logic to decide which arch folder to
install into in each package, depending on the target arch/platform.

Oh, and perhaps you would have a "default arch" of a system or some
such, which would just be a symlink pointing to the right binary...
dunno. Just kinda pondering.

libbob.1.2.3_x86-64.so
libbob.1.2.3_x86.so
libbob.1.2.3.so -> libbob.1.2.3_x86.so ???


On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 17:35, Jerry Haltom wrote:
> I'd just like to see how many violent reactions I get from the idea of
> throwing all libs into /lib, but naming the libs differently depending
> on their ABI:
> 
> libbob.1.2.3_x86-64.so
> libbob.1.2.3_x86.so
> 
> There's gotta be some reason I'm missing why this is a worse idea than
> /lib64.
> 
> :)
>