Meant to reply to the list.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jon Masters jonathan@jonmasters.org Subject: Re: AArch64 triplet Date: November 22, 2012 3:32:45 AM EST To: Mike Frysinger vapier@gentoo.org
On Nov 20, 2012, at 1:27 PM, Mike Frysinger vapier@gentoo.org wrote:
On Tuesday 20 November 2012 03:25:56 Jon Masters wrote:
The only reason for making a change at this time appears to be cosmetic, for removing /lib for example. I can understand that, and if we were discussing this a year ago (or even months ago when I first raised it on this list), then it might be a reasonable change, but at this time I cannot find an overwhelming technical justification.
i don't think removal of /lib/ is really feasible. that's the path that gets used for firmware (/lib/firmware/) and kernel modules (/lib/modules/<kver>/) regardless of the default ABI on the system.
similarly, userspace packages are using that path for supplemental files like the bootloader (grub) or ABI-independent settings (udev rules).
Sorry for the confusion. By "getting rid" what I mean is not having libraries in there. As is obvious, there will always be plenty of stuff in there, and it's mandated by standards anyway. So, really, if it's down to whether we (Fedora) have one thing in /lib that could be in /lib64 vs. not then I would rather just keep the dynamic linker where it is in /lib and move on with life.
By the way, we announced our initial Fedora bootstrap work tonight. The wiki has a lot of information about what is currently being done, along with initial images that will grow:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/AArch64
Jon.