ARMv4 vs ARMv6

Alastair Johnson alastair at
Thu Oct 16 16:33:04 CEST 2008

Andy Green wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> |> It wouldn't 'require' armv6 libs, it would still work fine if you
> |> install the armv6 mplayer with only armv4t libs in the rootfs. And FWIW,
> |> I expect mplayer to run approx. twice as fast when compiled with armv6
> |> since ffmpeg has seen a lot of optimization for armv6 (and armv6t2).
> |> And more importantly: mplayer has an internal copy of ffmpeg, so your
> |> example doesn't fly.
> Well if not ffmpeg than one of the other ton of libs mplayer package on
> Fedora anyway is built to want, from a look on Fedora mplayer, aac
> stuffs that I also mentioned.
> |  You might have
> | something else installed on the same box that required the v4 ones too,
> | so the /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 type thing is needed for same library /
> | different arch coexistence on one system.  It is like the i386 / x86_64
> | multiarch situation.
> |
> |> As Harald, Graeme and I said before: no, it's not like that
> Can you spell it out for this idiot WHY it isn't like that?  It's not
> like that because we can't handle parallel install of same lib of
> different arch?  Or we can handle it fine already?  How?  Just telling
> me I am wrong and OE is perfect is not really advancing my or anyone
> else's understanding of the situation.

If I'm understanding the explanations correctly it's analogous to mixing 
i386, i586 and i686 packages, not to x86 and x86_64 packages. Parallel 
installation isn't needed, and opkg will stop people installing armv6 
packages on armv4 systems.

More information about the devel mailing list