* 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