Subject: Re: ELF OS id, and multiple architectures
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/25/2000 13:01:58
In article <20000916162957.A10733@vaasje.org>,
Frank van der Linden <email@example.com> wrote:
> The problems start when you have two NetBSD platforms, X and Y, and Y can run
> binaries from X without modification, but can't use its native shared
> libraries for that, because of ABI differences. NetBSD has/will have several
> of these instances.
> If /usr/lib/<platformid> is a way around this, and it makes us adhere
> to the ELF spec as well, then I say we should go for it.
> I see no other good way to solve it. Two alternate suggestion would
> include to have a /emul as for OS emulations, but that's using
> a sledgehammer. Most of the time, you do not want the alternate
> path searches, except for shared libraries. The other would be
> having a smart ld.so and supply an alternate path for shared libs
> ourselves. But, if you're using alternate paths already, why
> not make them /usr/lib/<platformid> and match the spec as a bonus.
I totally agree. We should move int the /usr/lib/<platformid> direction.
Things get ugly though with /usr/pkg/lib, X etc.