lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateThu, 15 Sep 2005 08:16:27 +0200
FromHarald Dunkel <>
SubjectRe: Pure 64 bootloaders
Roger Heflin wrote:
>
> I guess I see 5 choices:
>
> #1:
> Use lib for whatever the standard os/arch size is.
>
> Use lib32 for the non-standard size.
>
> #2:
> Continue the current mess.
>
> #3:
> Use both lib32 and lib64 and maybe put a link from lib to the
> default one, probably lib64.
>
> #4:
> Use both lib32 and lib64 and don't put a link.
>
> #5:
> Designate the bit size in the name of the lib, ie libc.so64 or
> libc.so32 or something similar and put them all in the same
> directory and let the lib loading code take care of finding the
> correct size.
>

I would say there is a sixth option, at least in theory: Add some
special symbols like 'LP64' or 'ILP32' to the symbol table, and add
a reference to one of these symbols to every *.o file. The linker
could distinguish between 32bit and 64bit implementation within the
same library. This would be similar to a symbol-versioned library.
But I am not sure whether this would be a reasonable option.


Regards

Harri
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-09-15 08:20    [from the cache]
©2003-2009