Re: [gentoo-dev] Projects and subproject status

[Mike Frysinger]

On Saturday 12 January 2008, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 11-01-2008 21:52:08 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Tuesday 08 January 2008, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > > - sort out the 64-bits targets with their multilib-hell forced upon us
> >
> > dont know exactly what you're referring to, but multilib is completely
> > optional.
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.alt/3329

sorry, when i first read the multilib-hell, i assumed you meant the Gentoo 
pieces rather than the binutils/gcc pieces.

i could post some corrections to the piece there, but in the end, they wouldnt 
get you to a final working solution.

> Added to that that when I implemented the ldwrapper on amd64 (fedora)
> linux I didn't fully understand the full multilib picture, some
> decisions I made there now just feel plain wrong, especially given that
> each distro seems to implement the multilib thing different (Gentoo:
> /lib = native bits size, Fedora: /lib = 32-bits, Debian ...).
> I didn't get it fully right in my post above though, because every
> distro/os has a kernel configured in such a way that for a 64-bits
> object, the search path points to the 64-bits host-specific lib paths.
> So it seems that only binutils doesn't want to know about 64-bits
> host-specific lib paths, and gcc takes actions to compensate that.

i dont know why you keep saying "kernel" over and over when the kernel plays 
no role here whatsoever.  if you want to keep things sane, i would say just 
follow the tool convention and any/all distro conventions be damned.

longer term, i'm really not familiar with how the prefix stuff is architected, 
so i cant give much guidance unless i sat down and learned it.
-mike