I could launch it with:
# /lib/ld-linux-armhf.so.3 ./ioquake3.arm
I'm sure someone who knows about this can explain what's going on.
The issue is one of dynamic linker paths and sonames.
Upstream gcc used the same dynamic linker path for both hardfloat and softfloat binaries. This meant it was not possible for them to coexist on the same system. As a result debian moved the dynamic linker for hardfloat to /lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/ld-linux.so.3 . They thought they had concensus on this with other major distros but when it came time to push it upstream a load of new people brought their paintbrushes to the bikeshed.
A new concensus was formed to use /lib/ld-linux-armhf.so.3
This new name also meant a new soname for the dynamic linker and a hack had to be included in debians dynamic linker to manage binaries and libraries that were expecting different dynamic linker sonames.
Debian is working with upstream gcc/glibc on getting the new concensus implemented but I don't know how far along they are with that.
Anyway the quick fix for now is to symlink /lib/ld-linux.so.3 to /lib/ld-linux.so.3 . This means you lose the ability to do a multiarch install with a mixture of armel and armhf but I don't personally consider that too big a deal given that we have hardfloat versions of the broadcom libraries and multiarch is kinda experimental at the moment. The hexxh image has that symlink but if you bootstrap yourself you will have to create it manually. I guess I will include that symlink in the package for the videocore libraries when I create it.
Note that due to the soname change a debian/raspbian armhf binary will not work on distros that don't have these changes even if you create a symlink for the dynamic linker.
Now i've answerd your question can you answer one of mine which we really need to know before deciding how to package the broadcom libs?
How are these libs supposed to be used? are they supposed to replace the corresponding mesa libs or are they supposed to only be used for software specifically built for them? i'm guessing the latter since apparently they don't work with x11. Can you confirm this as it determines how we choose to package them.