On 04/10/2012 04:42 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
It's one of the things we're trying to achieve with multi-arch. We can
support mixed-ABI, mixed-OS, mixed-architecture environments cleanly
on one system, using a consistent set of packages for all. Setting up
a cross-compilation environment suddenly becomes easy - install the
cross-compiler and the libs for the target platform straight from a
normal Debian mirror as binary packages.
>
See http://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/TheCaseForMultiarch for more
rationale.
I've read it and still don't see the benefit, particularly as it relates
to mixed instruction sets. Or more precisely, I don't see the value in
supporting mixed instruction sets. Once you drop the mixed instruction
set argument I think the whole argument for embedding the target triplet
into the dynamic linker pathname falls apart.
We have to agree on a standard path if we're ever going to have
working cross-distro binaries, and that's increasingly important to us
in the ARM world. By all means ignore the multi-arch route that the
Debian world is following, but please accept our reasoning for the
linker location.
But the entire reason behind the need to embed the triplet into the
dynamic linker's path is the debian multi-arch stuff AFAICT. I think
that's what many folks are complaining about.
I realize the goal here is to allow a single binary to run on multiple
systems and I think that's a worthy goal.
Jeff
_______________________________________________
linaro-toolchain mailing list
linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
