* Richard W. M. Jones: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 02:21:56PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Richard W. M. Jones: >> >> >> I don't want us to have RPM spec file hacks just to get RISC-V to >> >> install in the correct locations. The symbolic link evidently does not >> >> cover all cases. >> > >> > What cases aren't covered by the symlink? We have a full, working >> > Fedora/RISC-V distro using it at the moment. >> >> The symbolic link isn't in the buildroot. > > This is indeed a problem. The symlink should be moved from glibc to > filesystem. I don't know why we put it in glibc, historical anomaly I > guess. I'll prepare a couple of PRs today which will have to be > carefully pushed in a single side tag to fix this. > >> If shared objects are listed >> explicitly in %files (as some guidelines recommend) and upstream >> hard-codes the ABI directory names for installation purposes, the build >> fails. >> >> Setting %_libdir to /usr/lib64/lp64d instead might work. Fixing >> upstream to honor --libdir=/usr/lib64 in ./configure might be another >> option. > > I'm still unclear on what exactly the problem is that this solves. > We've built hundreds of C libraries in Fedora/RISC-V with the current > set up and it appears to work fine. Will moving the symlink (alone) > fix this or is there some other error?
Sorry, see my other response. This is about the %buildroot/$RPM_BUILDROOT staging area used during the rpmbuild process, not the system installation. Thanks, Florian -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
