Re: [PATCH 3/4] udev: Change hard coded /usr/lib to support multilib

[Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>]

On 07/18/2011 05:30 PM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: openembedded-core-bounces@lists.openembedded.org
>> [mailto:openembedded-core-bounces@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of
>> Mark Hatle
>> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 11:30 PM
>> To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 3/4] udev: Change hard coded /usr/lib to support
>> multilib
>>
>> Replying to myself.. sorry, I misunderstood the concern.. see below for a new
>> explanation..
>>
>> On 7/18/11 10:25 AM, Mark Hatle wrote:
>>> On 7/18/11 7:32 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Op 18 jul 2011, om 09:08 heeft Koen Kooi het volgende geschreven:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Op 18 jul 2011, om 08:13 heeft Dongxiao Xu het volgende geschreven:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dongxiao Xu<dongxiao.xu@intel.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> meta/recipes-core/udev/udev-164/makefile.patch |   16
>> ++++++++++++++++
>>>>>> meta/recipes-core/udev/udev-new.inc            |    1 +
>>>>>> meta/recipes-core/udev/udev_164.bb             |    2 +-
>>>>>> 3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) create mode
>>>>>> 100644 meta/recipes-core/udev/udev-164/makefile.patch
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev-164/makefile.patch
>>>>>> b/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev-164/makefile.patch
>>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>>> index 0000000..c46ff4b
>>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-core/udev/udev-164/makefile.patch
>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
>>>>>> +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [configuration]
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you explain why it's inappropriate for upstream but why we do need it
>> here?
>>>>
>>>> I asked the udev maintainer:
>>>>
>>>> 14:25<  koen>  kay: the udev Makefile.am has 'ln -sf $(libexecdir)/udev-acl
>> $(DESTDIR)$(prefix)/lib/ConsoleKit/run-seat.d/udev-acl.ck', any reason for not
>> using ${libdir} over ${prefix}/lib ?
>>>> 14:29<  kay>  koen: libdir is /usr/lib64 here, can't use that
>>>>
>>>> So upstream is aware of multilib, but wants to put these scripts in a
>> non-multilib dir. Since I don't have any experience with the fedora/opensuse
>> way of multilib nor the new oe-core one, could you please explain why oe-core
>> needs this patch, but fedora/opensuse don't?
>>>
>>> This is likely a problem with the multilib fix.  "libexecdir" is often
>>> /usr/lib on many distribuions.. however as your other email
>>> mentioned.. setting it to
>>> /usr/lib64 is a mistake.  It should be /usr/libexec or /usr/lib64.
>>> All of the associated multilib packages should work correctly and no
>>> conflicts introduced with this package (file contents should be
>>> identical.)
>>>
>>> It should be permissible for libexecdir to be changed in the
>>> configuration if someone really wants it to be.  By default (in bitbake.conf) it
>> is:
>>>
>>> export libexecdir = "${exec_prefix}/libexec"
>>
>>> +-	mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(prefix)/lib/ConsoleKit/run-seat.d
>>> +-	ln -sf $(libexecdir)/udev-acl
>> $(DESTDIR)$(prefix)/lib/ConsoleKit/run-seat.d/udev-acl.ck
>>> ++	mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(libdir)/ConsoleKit/run-seat.d
>>> ++	ln -sf $(libexecdir)/udev-acl
>>> ++$(DESTDIR)$(libdir)/ConsoleKit/run-seat.d/udev-acl.ck
>>
>> I see libexecdir CAN be changed.. so the above is already possible..
>>
>> The part they had hard coded is "/usr/lib/ConsoleKit"...  There is only one
>> location in the system for ConsoleKit configuration files/scripts.. and that is
>> distro specific.  Assuming the oe based distributions use
>> $(PREFIX)/lib/ConsoleKit.. then the previous was correct.
>>
>> The point being it doesn't matter if it's 32-bit, 64-bit or 24-bit...  only one
>> ConsoleKit per system should exist.  (There are potentially other files on the
>> system like this.  I know a recent RPM patch went in that separated
>> /usr/lib/rpm and /usr/lib64/rpm..  this is also a similar mistake, I just haven't
>> had time to get a patch out to revert that chunk.)
>
> So for multilib system, we have /usr/lib32 and /usr/lib64 to contain only *.so files, while there is still /usr/lib directory which contains other types of files, right?

in ideal world /usr/lib could just be a symlink to default multilib