On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 02:36:17PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Aurelien Jarno <aurel...@aurel32.net> writes: > > > Goswin von Brederlow a écrit : > >> Aurelien Jarno <aurel...@aurel32.net> writes: > >> > >>> One of the goal of multiarch is to avoid having packages containing > >>> binaries of a different architecture than the one of the package (e.g. > >>> i386 binaries in an amd64 package), in order to make packages of > >>> different architecture co-installable. If we start to break this goal, > >>> we will have packages using the multiarch path, but not co-installable, > >>> for example i386 libc bundled in an i386.deb and in an amd64.deb won't > >>> be co-installable. > >> > >> Already broken for 2 stable releases. > > > > We are not using multiarch paths in Debian, so this has never happens. > > When using standard /usr/lib paths, people are expecting that the paths > > collide. When using multiarch they do not expect that, as it the goal of > > multiarch. > > All biarch packages contain binary objects of a foreign architecture > (that is kind of the point of them). Some do contain binaries. Some > contain conffiles. One contains the dynamic loader. Prime example is > libc6 vs. libc6-i386/amd64.
Why can't we move the dynamic linker as well? It's not hard-coded; it's in the DT_INTERP section of the ELF binary. If you have a multi-arch /lib as well as /usr/lib, there's no reason why it's not possible to move it (and obviously keep a symlink until everything is rebuilt). Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org