Armhf dynamic linker path

[Wookey]

+++ Mike Frysinger [2012-04-02 19:56 -0400]:
> >>> i agree that the ldso needs changing to something unique so everyone
> >>> can start off on the same page with a sane path.  i don't think
> >>> forcing everyone into the multi-arch stuff that debian is deploying
> >>> makes sense though.  this seems like a fairly behind-the-back maneuver
> >>> in terms of slipping it into mainline.
> >>
> >>
> >> Right. For clarification, we (Fedora) have no plans to do multi-arch
> >> (though I know many of us are personally interested in the idea). That
> >> doesn't mean we can't have a platform specific linker path change.
> >
> > yes, this was brought up at Linaro Connect as well; having the ldso name in
> > a multiarch location doesn't mean that anything else needs to be in this
> > location.
> 
> while true, it seems like /lib/<ldso> vs /lib/<multiarch>/<ldso> needs
> to be handled by the multiarch people regardless (for historical
> support), while non-multiarch peeps never have /lib/xxx/ subdirs.

It isn't helpful to think about this as a 'multiarch' thing. It's
about having a unique linker path everyone uses for a particular ABI
so that binaries can be run on more than one distro. 

The use of a GNU triplet to distinguish the 'armhf' ABI linker path is
just a sensible way to do it (and it'll work for future arches/ABIs
too). That brings no multiarchness at all with it.

> i know it's a bit of bike shedding, but if the mainline standard is
> /lib/<ldso> and multiarch peeps have to deal with that already, it'd
> make more sense to stick with /lib/<ldso>.

No-one can 'deal' with the fact that you can't have binaries of
different ABIs work in the same filesystem unless they have unique
linker paths. And if we want 3rd-party-shipped binaries to work on
(say, Redhat and Debian and Ubuntu and Fedora (which we do), those
distros need to be using the same linker path). 

So that requires a path that is unique across ABIs and common across
distros. 

Riku has helpfully documented the current state here. 

> > I am a bit surprised that this comes up again, and I really would
> > like to settle this within the next two weeks. Note that Ubuntu 11.10
> > already did ship with this ldso name based on these discussions.  Jon,
> > afaicr I did ask this very same question (if the ldso name in a multiarch
> > location would be acceptable) at Linaro Connect in August 2011 in Cambridge,
> > and afaicr you didn't object to this path.
> 
> i've never attended a conference in Cambridge (US or UK).  maybe
> you're remembering something else ?

He said 'Jon' and was talking about Jon masters 

Wookey
-- 
Principal hats:  Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM
http://wookware.org/