Re: LSB 3.1 status for etch
Mats Wichmann <email@example.com> writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Sven Luther <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>>> On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 01:28:04PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>>> What does the LSB 3.1 say about amd64 and libdirs? Does it require lib
>>>> to contain 32bit libs?
>>> Does this same question apply to other 64bit arches, like sparc64 or powerpc64
>>> for example ?
>> Theoreticaly yes. But they have 32bit libs in lib and 64bit libs in
>> lib64 anyway.
>> Amd64 has 64bit libs in lib and lib64 (link to lib). 32bit libs are in
>> /emul/ia32-linux/... and lib32 (link to emul) just like ia64 has. That
>> is different from other linux distributions.
>>> Sven Luther
> the LSB for any given archtiecture does not require support for any
> others - they're independent. so the amd64 setup is fine via the
> symlink, *until* someone decides they want to support ia32 and amd64
> on the same system, because in this case the ia32 libs are expected to
> be in /lib (same issue for ia64 fwiw). LSB did have a proposal for
> that written by Matt Taggart, but not implemented in the spec.
The problem for Debian is that binutils still does not support this
(/usr/lib/arch-os-gnu/) proposal and all the patches for multiarch are
pending only on binutils now. I bet that if Debian had made the change
then LSB would have given it more consideration.