Re: [Linux-ia64] Re: PROPOSED: 32/64 bit coexistance
David Mosberger <davidm@hpl.hp.com> writes:
>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Sep 2001 19:50:52 +0200, Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de> said:
>
> >> It turns out that three of the four resulting possibilities make
> >> sense:
> >>
> >> (1) ia64/ilp32 (2) ia64/lp64 (3) x86/ilp32
>
> Andreas> Then we should discuss where those will end. For ia64, the
> Andreas> places are according to the proposal:
>
> Andreas> (1) not defined
> Andreas> (2) /lib and /usr/lib
> Andreas> (3) not defind - but not /lib
>
> (2) is fine, but I think LSB should also (3)---at least for ia64.
> It's important for distributors to agree on the local of (3). The
> current proposal is /emul/ia32-linux.
I agree and will add it to the proposal.
> >> Now, as far as /libXX is concerned: in my opinion, /lib should
> >> contain the "native" or "preferred" library format (primarily for
> >> source compatibility and user convenience reasons). LSB is in
> >> denial if it claims /lib is used for 32-bit libraries only. Both
> >> IA-64 and Alpha use it for 64-bit libraries and if, god forbid,
> >> someone ever added ILP32 support to IA-64 Linux, those libraries
> >> would certainly go into /lib32 or something of that sort. LSB
> >> should consider and accommodate this case.
>
> Andreas> The proposal should just do this - and defines the
> Andreas> "preferred" library format. For both ia64 and Alpha, it's
> Andreas> 64-bit but for PPC64, Sparc64 etc it's 32-bit.
>
> If that's the idea, good. From the description that you quoted, it
> sounded like the "Alpha case" was there solely for historical
> purposes, which would be misleading. /lib should *always* contain the
> "preferred" library format.
But there are the following questions which I hope to get solved:
- what's the preferred format on a platform?
- where will the other formats live?
- where should emulations live?
I'm reworking the proposal tomorrow,
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger
SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
private aj@arthur.inka.de
http://www.suse.de/~aj
Reply to: