Subject: Re: HEADS UP: migration to fully dynamic linked "base" system
To: Noriyuki Soda <email@example.com>
From: David Brownlee <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/26/2002 19:01:50
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Noriyuki Soda wrote:
> I believe this should be /libexec/ld.elf_so rather than /lib
> as already pointed out in tech-userlevel.
> 1. We use "libexec" for this purpose. Using "lib" breaks consistency.
> 2. Although currently ld.elf_so is the only program which belongs to
> this directory, that doesn't mean we never have such programs
> (other than ld.elf_so) which should go to /libexec in the future.
> Please remember that we had /usr/libdata in the days when we don't
> have any contents in it yet.
> 3. Using "/lib/ld.elf_so" doesn't introduce compatiblity with other
> systems. Note that Solaris and Linux uses "/lib/ld.so" rather than
So would /lib/ld.so make more sense for us than /lib/ld.elf_so?
I'm assuming here that we do not have any non-elf active -current
David/absolute -- www.netbsd.org: No hype required --