On 02.04.2012 21:46, Jon Masters wrote:
On 04/02/2012 03:04 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 09:19, Riku Voipio<riku.voi...@linaro.org> wrote:
On 31 March 2012 19:52, Dennis Gilmore<den...@gilmore.net.au> wrote:
Linaro Connect and other events are probably the worst place for such
decisions and discussions to be made. though maybe there is not a good
place. the wider community needs to be engaged for greatest acceptance.
otherwise then if falls into the vacuum of those attending the events.
Like I said its not that it could never happen just that its not been
discussed at all. so requesting that distros adopt it is a bit harsh
and unrealistic.
At Linaro conference the need for changing linker path was agreed on,
as well as the need to get a wide community agreement on it. To do the
latter, an ARM minisummit was organized on at Plumbers 2011 [1].
Invites to wide range communities and distributions were sent, and for
most someone attended. For the people not able to join physically, a
call-in line was organized (I was on the call for example). With the
expectation that people who attended in face or on call would convey
the message back to their own communities. This didn't seemingly
happen for everyone it seems.
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.
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.
thanks, Matthias
_______________________________________________
linaro-toolchain mailing list
linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
