[csw-maintainers] Architecture-dependency binary placement policy

[Philip Brown]

sounds about right

On Saturday, July 3, 2010, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski
<maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> In other words, where to put which kind of binaries.  I'm finishing to
> integrate a binary file parser into checkpkg and would like to come up
> with a set of rules about the binary placement.
>
> Based on previous experience and our the page[1] about architecture
> optimization, the policy is as follows:
>
> - binaries in directories named 'bin', 'lib' and 'libexec' must be
> either sparcv8 or hardlinks to isaexec
> - binaries which are non sparcv8 must be placed in a subdirectory
> named after the architecture, with variants allowed; sparcv8plus
> binaries can be placed in directories named sparcv8plus,
> sparcv8plus+vis, or sparcv8plus+vis2
>
> Is this correct?
>
> [1] http://www.opencsw.org/extend-it/contribute-packages/build-standards/architecture-optimization-using-isaexec-and-isalist/
> _______________________________________________
> maintainers mailing list
> maintainers at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
> .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
>