Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>]

On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 12:26:08AM -0700, Seth Alan Woolley wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 06:30:19PM +0200, Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik wrote:
> >
> > Another issue I would like to stuff someplace is /lib64
> > 
> > Do we really need to bother with supporting both instead of just putting
> > things into /lib and be done with.
> > 
> > This would reduce the need to handle specs files in the gcc spell.
> > Considering we overwrite this everywhere else we should do it for the
> > loader as well:
> > 
> > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 to /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
> > 
> > And be done with it.
> 
> I was the one who added the initial support for /lib instead of /lib64 for 
> our gcc/glibc spells.
> 
> I made it optional because our first attempt at an x86_64 iso was multi-lib 
> and I didn't want to interfere with backwards incompatibility.
> 
> Technically the standards compliance would demand that we put the primary 
> libs in /lib and multi-lib if we supported it into /lib32.
> 
> There's no reason to use multilib anymore for 99% of people because even 
> flash works on 64-bit.
> 
> Let's dump the /lib64 hackery for good so we are consistent, please, it's 
> easier for every other spell that's not autotools in the long run.

I agree, I never liked the split. And even if a split is done, my
opinion is that /lib should be the primary location, i.e. if the system
is 64bit, all libs should go to /lib and compatibilty to /lib32.

-- 
Arwed v. Merkatz                              Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
                                                    http://www.sourcemage.org