ld.so path (was: Re: RFC: Changing ELFOSABI_FREEBSD into ELFOSABI_SYSV/ELFOSABI_NONE)

[Petr Salinger]

> > >See also http://www.linuxbase.org/futures/ideas/multiarch/index.html
> > >
> > >What about /lib/ld-kfreebsd-i386.so.2 and /lib/ld-kfreebsd-amd64.so.2 ?
> > Yes, that's the base of multi-arch. Currently bi-arch is implemented via 
> >  /lib and /lib64, but that's not suitable for us. Maybe we will have to 
> > speak with the multi-arch people in Debian to make sure we use the same 
> > standars. There was a presentation of it at Debconf5.
> 
> Where are we on this?  x86_64-linux-gnu sets /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.X, so
> by analogy we'd be /lib64/ld-kfreebsd-x86-64.so.X.
> 
> Is that ok?  We need to take a decision on this before patches for x86_64
> support can be sent upstream.

I strongly prefer to put ld-kfreebsd-x86-64.so.1 into /lib, not /lib64.

ld-kfreebsd-x86-64.so.1 will be primary dynamic linker for amd64,
all standard libraries will be in /lib, /usr/lib, ...

IMHO /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 is big mistake.
amd64/i386 situation is far from sparc64/sparc or s390x/s390.
amd64 is complete 64bit port, not only extension of primary 32bit port.

Petr