Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 12:39:13 +0300
From: Timo Teras <>
Subject: Re: Progress on roadmap to 0.9.13

On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 03:59:12 -0400
Rich Felker <> wrote:

> One key target for 0.9.13 which I didn't cover above is improving
> "make install" and possibly tweaking the symlink strategy for
> and At several times in the past, I was fairly convinced
> that it makes more sense to reverse the symlink direction and have
> point to rather than the other way around. However,
> I keep going back to doubting that there's any good reason for it to
> change. So if there are people who still care about this issue, I'd
> really like to hear you speak up _now_ rather than 2 days before the
> next release, or after the next release. If there's no progress on
> justifying changes, I think the only changes I'm going to make in this
> area are to fix lack-of-atomicity issues during installation.

Sorry for late answer.

IIRC the advantages were:

- Easier to install different subarch (even compatible arch versions)
  side by side. As names are unique - is same for all so
  those would need to be renamed anyway.

- and libc.a can go to /usr/lib if is just an
  optional symlink. this is desirable as the development stuff are not
  nice to keep in /lib.

So I would at least like to have the symlink direction changed.

Or alternatively have something like:
  /lib/ld-musl-<arch>.so.1 -><abiver
  /usr/lib/ -> /lib/<abiver>

Allowing of course /usr/lib to be a toolchain specific prefix.

- Timo

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.