On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 11:34:37PM +0800, Yunqiang Su wrote: > Hi, as I asked that guys, they insist on using /usr/lib but not /usr/libo32. > :-(
Who are the guys? What is the argument on using /usr/lib instead of /usr/libo32? > Then, maybe this patch should be OK. I don't think it is ok. I don't feel comfortable in using the same directory for the system and biarch libraries. It means we won't be able to search among 64-bit libraries without looking at o32 libraries. > please consider it. What I propose is to merge all the non-biarch stuff, as a first step. Actually it might be already enough as o32 libraries can already be installed using multiarch. > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:24 AM, Yunqiang Su <wzss...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I refreshed this patch with 2.18-6. > > > > On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Yunqiang Su <wzss...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Aurelien Jarno <aurel...@aurel32.net> > >> wrote: > >>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:25:55PM +0800, Yunqiang Su wrote: > >>>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:25 PM, Yunqiang Su <wzss...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > I refresh this patch with 2.18-4, and > >>>> > > >>>> > let libc6 breaks: > >>>> > > >>>> > libc6-mips64 [mips64 mips64el], > >>>> > libc6-mipsn32 [mipsn32 mipsn32el], > >>>> > libc6-mips32 [mips mipsel], > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Yunqiang Su <wzss...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> >> I refresh this patch with 2.18-3 > >>>> >> > >>>> >> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:50 AM, YunQiang Su <wzss...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> >>> I refresh the patches with 2.17-93. > >>>> >>> It's time to consider to merge it. > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> Now we have about 7000 packages build successfully already. > >>>> >>> This architecture may be in debian-ports in near future. > >>> > >>> Please find my comments about this patch below. > >>> > >>>> [ snip ] > >>> > >>>> diff -urN a/debian/rules.d/build.mk b/debian/rules.d/build.mk > >>>> --- a/debian/rules.d/build.mk 2014-03-02 15:01:31.000000000 +0000 > >>>> +++ b/debian/rules.d/build.mk 2014-04-25 14:14:27.708058521 +0000 > >>>> @@ -233,7 +233,7 @@ > >>>> # the multiarch ld.so doesn't look at the (non-standard) /lib32, > >>>> so we > >>>> # need path compatibility when biarch and multiarch packages are > >>>> both > >>>> # installed. > >>>> - case $(call xx,slibdir) in /lib32 | /lib64 | /libx32) \ > >>>> + case $(call xx,slibdir) in /lib32 | /lib64 | /libx32 | /lib) \ > >>>> mkdir -p debian/tmp-$(curpass)/etc/ld.so.conf.d; \ > >>>> > >>>> conffile="debian/tmp-$(curpass)/etc/ld.so.conf.d/zz_$(curpass)-biarch-compat.conf"; > >>>> \ > >>>> echo "# Legacy biarch compatibility support" > $$conffile; \ > >>> > >>> Why do you need this change? This will create a ld.so.conf entry even > >>> for /lib, while ld.so should always be configured to look for /lib and > >>> /lib/$(DEB_HOST_ARCH_MULTIARCH) without even an ld.so.conf entry. > >>> Moreover, with this change such a file would be created for all > >>> architectures, not only mips64. > >>> > >>> Please look why ld.so doesn't look to /lib by default. > >> > >> It looks /lib. I dropped this snip. > >> > >>> > >>>> diff -urN a/debian/rules.d/build.mk.orig b/debian/rules.d/build.mk.orig > >>>> --- a/debian/rules.d/build.mk.orig 1970-01-01 00:00:00.000000000 +0000 > >>>> +++ b/debian/rules.d/build.mk.orig 2014-04-25 14:14:27.708058521 +0000 > >>> > >>>> [ snip ] > >>> > >>> Please don't include such an orig file in your patch. > >>> > >>>> [ snip ] > >>> > >>>> diff -urN a/debian/rules.d/control.mk.orig > >>>> b/debian/rules.d/control.mk.orig > >>>> --- a/debian/rules.d/control.mk.orig 1970-01-01 00:00:00.000000000 +0000 > >>>> +++ b/debian/rules.d/control.mk.orig 2014-04-25 14:14:27.708058521 +0000 > >>> > >>> Same here > >>> > >>>> [ snip ] > >>> > >>>> diff -urN a/debian/rules.d/debhelper.mk b/debian/rules.d/debhelper.mk > >>>> --- a/debian/rules.d/debhelper.mk 2014-03-02 15:01:31.000000000 +0000 > >>>> +++ b/debian/rules.d/debhelper.mk 2014-04-25 14:14:27.708058521 +0000 > >>>> @@ -223,7 +223,7 @@ > >>>> pass="" \ > >>>> suffix="" \ > >>>> ;; \ > >>>> - *:/lib32 | *:/lib64 | *:/libx32 | *:/lib/arm-linux-gnueabi*) \ > >>>> + *:/lib32 | *:/lib64 | *:/libx32 | *:/lib | > >>>> *:/lib/arm-linux-gnueabi*) \ > >>> > >>> I guess it's because the multilib o32 version is installed in /lib, > >>> right? But see below. > >>> > >> > >> Yes > >> > >>> > >>>> templates="libc libc-dev" \ > >>>> pass="-alt" \ > >>>> suffix="-$(curpass)" \ > >>>> @@ -240,6 +240,9 @@ > >>>> if [ "$$s" != "$$t" ] ; then \ > >>>> cp $$s $$t ; \ > >>>> fi ; \ > >>>> + if [ "$$suffix" = "-mips32" ] ; then \ > >>>> + sed -e '/ld.so.conf.d /etc/d' -i $$t; \ > >>>> + fi ; \ > >>> > >>> What is that supposed to do? > >> > >> This is used to avoid installing zz_mips32-biarch-compat.conf > >> for /lib and /usr/lib . > >> > >> $$t is debian/libc6-mips32.install here. > >> > >>> > >>>> sed -e "s#TMPDIR#debian/tmp-$$curpass#g" -i $$t; \ > >>>> sed -e "s#RTLDDIR#$$rtlddir#g" -i $$t; \ > >>>> sed -e "s#SLIBDIR#$$slibdir#g" -i $$t; \ > >>> > >>> > >>>> [ snip ] > >>> > >>>> diff -urN a/debian/sysdeps/mips64el.mk b/debian/sysdeps/mips64el.mk > >>>> --- a/debian/sysdeps/mips64el.mk 1970-01-01 00:00:00.000000000 +0000 > >>>> +++ b/debian/sysdeps/mips64el.mk 2014-04-25 14:14:27.712058556 +0000 > >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,54 @@ > >>>> +libc_add-ons = ports nptl $(add-ons) > >>>> +libc_rtlddir = /lib64 > >>>> + > >>>> +# build 32-bit (n32) alternative library > >>>> +EGLIBC_PASSES += mipsn32 > >>>> +DEB_ARCH_REGULAR_PACKAGES += libc6-mipsn32 libc6-dev-mipsn32 > >>>> +mipsn32_add-ons = ports nptl $(add-ons) > >>>> +mipsn32_configure_target = mips64el-linux-gnuabin32 > >>>> +mipsn32_CC = $(CC) -mabi=n32 -mno-plt > >>>> +mipsn32_CXX = $(CXX) -mabi=n32 -mno-plt > >>>> +libc6-mipsn32_shlib_dep = libc6-mipsn32 (>= $(shlib_dep_ver)) > >>>> +mipsn32_rtlddir = /lib32 > >>>> +mipsn32_slibdir = /lib32 > >>>> +mipsn32_libdir = /usr/lib32 > >>>> +mipsn32_extra_config_options := $(extra_config_options) > >>>> --disable-profile > >>>> + > >>>> +# build 32-bit (o32) alternative library > >>>> +EGLIBC_PASSES += mips32 > >>>> +DEB_ARCH_REGULAR_PACKAGES += libc6-mips32 libc6-dev-mips32 > >>>> +mips32_add-ons = ports nptl $(add-ons) > >>>> +mips32_configure_target = mipsel-linux-gnu > >>>> +mips32_CC = $(CC) -mabi=32 -mno-plt > >>>> +mips32_CXX = $(CXX) -mabi=32 -mno-plt > >>>> +libc6-mips32_shlib_dep = libc6-mips32 (>= $(shlib_dep_ver)) > >>>> +mips32_rtlddir = /lib > >>>> +mips32_slibdir = /lib > >>>> +mips32_libdir = /usr/lib > >>> > >>> For what I understand there, the o32 library is installed in /lib, which > >>> might conflict with the system libraries on some aspects. Wouldn't it be > >>> better to install it in for example in /libo32 instead? Of course > >>> rtlddir would stay in /lib to be conform with the ABI. > >> > >> I agree with you about this, while some guys think install to /lib is > >> required. > >> https://lists.debian.org/debian-mips/2013/06/msg00006.html > >> > >> Let's try to explain to them again? > >> > >>> > >>> Note that it is only for the multilib packages, so basically the > >>> toolchain (libc + compiler). mips o32 multiarch packages will of course > >>> be installed in /usr/lib/mips-linux-gnu. > >>> > >>> The same is also the case for the other mipsn32/mips64 .mk files. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B > >>> aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Yunqiang Su > > > > > > > > -- > > Yunqiang Su > > > > -- > Yunqiang Su > -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
