Re: Pure 64 bootloaders

[Harald Dunkel <harald.dunkel@t-online.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 990 bytes --]

Roger Heflin wrote:
> 
> I guess I see 5 choices:
> 
> #1:
> Use lib for whatever the standard os/arch size is.
> 
> Use lib32 for the non-standard size.
> 
> #2: 
> Continue the current mess.
> 
> #3:
> Use both lib32 and lib64 and maybe put a link from lib to the
> default one, probably lib64.
> 
> #4:
> Use both lib32 and lib64 and don't put a link.
> 
> #5:
> Designate the bit size in the name of the lib, ie libc.so64 or
> libc.so32 or something similar and put them all in the same
> directory and let the lib loading code take care of finding the
> correct size.
> 

I would say there is a sixth option, at least in theory: Add some
special symbols like 'LP64' or 'ILP32' to the symbol table, and add
a reference to one of these symbols to every *.o file. The linker
could distinguish between 32bit and 64bit implementation within the
same library. This would be similar to a symbol-versioned library.
But I am not sure whether this would be a reasonable option.


Regards

Harri

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 256 bytes --]