On 06/07/2014 09:49 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
ldd /usr/bin/mount linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fffc7531000) / libmount.so.1 => /lib64/libmount.so.1 (0x00007f626560d000) / libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00007f626525d000) / libblkid.so.1 => /lib64/libblkid.so.1 (0x00007f6265022000) / libselinux.so.1 => /lib64/libselinux.so.1 (0x00007f6264dfe000) / /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x0000003000000000) / libuuid.so.1 => /lib64/libuuid.so.1 (0x00007f6264bf8000) / libdl.so.2 => /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x00007f62649f4000) / libpcre.so.1 => /lib64/libpcre.so.1 (0x00007f626478e000) / libpthread.so.0 => /lib64/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007f626456f000)
Notice they are all out of lib64 now (for the /usr/bin/mount binary!)
I commend and applaud you for that, but I think you and openSuse have it backwards. On a 64-bit machine 'native' should be /bin, /usr/bin, /lib, /usr/lib. I don't think there should be a /lin64. I said NATIVE and I meant that. Perhaps, if there is a need for backwards compatability, there might be a /lib32/ and /usr/lib32. What? Oh, right, the old 32 bit programs _assume_ /lib and /usr/lib. But lets face it. Do the new one _assume_ /lib64 or is that just an artifice of the linker? We pay one hell of a price for backward compatibility. Its bad enough that the x86 architecture has backward compatibility issues for earlier Windows and DOS. http://ianmurdock.com/platforms/on-the-importance-of-backward-compatibility/ https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/en/Application_Compatibility http://night-ray.blogspot.ca/2014/02/linux-backwards-binary-compatibility.ht... http://www.pixelbeat.org/programming/linux_binary_compatibility.html http://www.linuxhelp.net/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t3861.html Can you really run the old SCO binaries on modern Linux? http://www.linux.org/threads/types-of-executables.4792/ And http://www.es.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/binary-formats.html <quote> When Linux made its painful transition to ELF, it was due to their inflexible jump-table based shared library mechanism, which made the construction of shared libraries difficult for vendors and developers. Since ELF tools offered a solution to the shared library problem and were generally seen as “the way forward”, the migration cost was accepted as necessary and the transition made. </quote> Where was Aaron when we made that transition? Why wasn't he complaining about it? -- /"\ \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML Mail / \ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org