* Re: [Linux-ia64] Re: Wolverine RPMs
2001-09-05 16:47 [Linux-ia64] Re: Wolverine RPMs Don Dugger
@ 2001-09-05 17:57 ` Doug Beattie
2001-09-05 19:20 ` Saxena, Sunil
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Doug Beattie @ 2001-09-05 17:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-ia64
Don and others:
Let's not forget what might need to be considered to allow LSB 32 bit
compliant apps on IA64. Even though no one may ever certify for this,
it would be nice to find out and follow a convention that would
benefit all.
Doug
Don Dugger wrote:
>
> Bill raises an interesting problem. I'd like to suggest a solution and see
> what everyone thinks. Since all of the shared objects are loaded by code
> in `ld-linux.so' I can modify the IA32 version of that library to first try
> an absolute path and, if that fails, because it's missing or has the wrong
> architecture, to then tack on a unique prefix, either something like
> `/usr/ia32' or the contents of an environment variable like `LD_IA32_PATH'.
>
> This is a little ugly since all of the distro's would have to install s
> special version of `ld-linux.so' but at least this is just one library
> so that cuts the pain down a little bit.
>
> Does anyone have a better idea?
>
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 11:59:31AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> >
> > The biggest problem I've seen is with programs that have hardcoded paths
> > for shared objects they dlopen(). Obviously this fails pretty badly when
> > the ia32 binary trys to dlopen() an ia64 library.
> >
> > Notably, this affects GTK+ when trying to use themes, and anything that
> > uses PAM.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ia64-list mailing list
> > ia64-list@redhat.com
> > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ia64-list
>
> --
> Don Dugger
> "Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale
> n0ano@valinux.com
> Ph: 303/938-9838
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-IA64 mailing list
> Linux-IA64@linuxia64.org
> http://lists.linuxia64.org/lists/listinfo/linux-ia64
--
Douglas B. Beattie
------------------
Linux Test Architect - Caldera, Inc.
dbb@caldera.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* RE: [Linux-ia64] Re: Wolverine RPMs
2001-09-05 16:47 [Linux-ia64] Re: Wolverine RPMs Don Dugger
2001-09-05 17:57 ` Doug Beattie
@ 2001-09-05 19:20 ` Saxena, Sunil
2001-09-10 9:21 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-09-10 17:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Saxena, Sunil @ 2001-09-05 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-ia64
Have you folks looked at the "UNIX System V Application Binary Interface" at
http://developer.intel.com/design/IA-64/ ? Section 5.3.1 suggests locations
for the libraries.
Thanks
Sunil
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Beattie [mailto:dbb@caldera.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 10:57 AM
To: Don Dugger
Cc: Bill Nottingham; ia64-list@redhat.com; linux-ia64@linuxia64.org
Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] Re: Wolverine RPMs
Don and others:
Let's not forget what might need to be considered to allow LSB 32 bit
compliant apps on IA64. Even though no one may ever certify for this,
it would be nice to find out and follow a convention that would
benefit all.
Doug
Don Dugger wrote:
>
> Bill raises an interesting problem. I'd like to suggest a solution and
see
> what everyone thinks. Since all of the shared objects are loaded by code
> in `ld-linux.so' I can modify the IA32 version of that library to first
try
> an absolute path and, if that fails, because it's missing or has the wrong
> architecture, to then tack on a unique prefix, either something like
> `/usr/ia32' or the contents of an environment variable like
`LD_IA32_PATH'.
>
> This is a little ugly since all of the distro's would have to install s
> special version of `ld-linux.so' but at least this is just one library
> so that cuts the pain down a little bit.
>
> Does anyone have a better idea?
>
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 11:59:31AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> >
> > The biggest problem I've seen is with programs that have hardcoded paths
> > for shared objects they dlopen(). Obviously this fails pretty badly when
> > the ia32 binary trys to dlopen() an ia64 library.
> >
> > Notably, this affects GTK+ when trying to use themes, and anything that
> > uses PAM.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ia64-list mailing list
> > ia64-list@redhat.com
> > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ia64-list
>
> --
> Don Dugger
> "Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale
> n0ano@valinux.com
> Ph: 303/938-9838
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-IA64 mailing list
> Linux-IA64@linuxia64.org
> http://lists.linuxia64.org/lists/listinfo/linux-ia64
--
Douglas B. Beattie
------------------
Linux Test Architect - Caldera, Inc.
dbb@caldera.com
_______________________________________________
Linux-IA64 mailing list
Linux-IA64@linuxia64.org
http://lists.linuxia64.org/lists/listinfo/linux-ia64
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Linux-ia64] Re: Wolverine RPMs
2001-09-05 16:47 [Linux-ia64] Re: Wolverine RPMs Don Dugger
2001-09-05 17:57 ` Doug Beattie
2001-09-05 19:20 ` Saxena, Sunil
@ 2001-09-10 9:21 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-09-10 17:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jes Sorensen @ 2001-09-10 9:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-ia64
>>>>> "Doug" = Doug Beattie <dbb@caldera.com> writes:
Doug> Don and others: Let's not forget what might need to be
Doug> considered to allow LSB 32 bit compliant apps on IA64. Even
Doug> though no one may ever certify for this, it would be nice to
Doug> find out and follow a convention that would benefit all.
I thought we had settled on this years ago, there will be no LP32
Linux/ia64 support. It's just a waste of effort on maintenance, ie. I
don't fancy maintaining two copies of glibc.
Jes
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Linux-ia64] Re: Wolverine RPMs
2001-09-05 16:47 [Linux-ia64] Re: Wolverine RPMs Don Dugger
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2001-09-10 9:21 ` Jes Sorensen
@ 2001-09-10 17:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2001-09-10 17:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-ia64
On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 11:21:11AM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> >>>>> "Doug" = Doug Beattie <dbb@caldera.com> writes:
>
> Doug> Don and others: Let's not forget what might need to be
> Doug> considered to allow LSB 32 bit compliant apps on IA64. Even
> Doug> though no one may ever certify for this, it would be nice to
> Doug> find out and follow a convention that would benefit all.
>
> I thought we had settled on this years ago, there will be no LP32
> Linux/ia64 support. It's just a waste of effort on maintenance, ie. I
> don't fancy maintaining two copies of glibc.
In this context 32Bit = IA32.
Christoph
--
Whip me. Beat me. Make me maintain AIX.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread