Re: Loader Magic
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Jerry Haltom wrote:
>
> > Like, if im running a dual 32/64 system, /lib64 makes sense, but if i'm
> > not, then I would want everything in /lib... but the package can only
> > put stuff in one place or the other. =/ So, we're stuck with /lib64,
> > which I think is ugly, Until the End Of Time.
>
> The linux standard base and the filesystem standards clearly specify that
> /lib is used for the 'default' libraries for the platform, and that
> /lib<foo> are used for platform-specific alternate libraries. So
> /lib64 is *not* going to persist indefinitely.
>
> It's really pointless arguing over this here; debian has a responsibility
> to follow the appropriate standards. You should take up your arguments
> with the standards groups instead.
We also have a responsibility towards our users that I think would be
better satisfied by going the same way as Red Hat and SuSE. The point is
that they have already done this and in an effective way defined how amd64
linux looks like. I think we should have at least a strong technical
reason for not going lib64, not just being different because it looks
ugly.
Had we been first or among the first, this would be a different
discussion, but going another way now would only be painful for 3rd-party
software, both free and non-free, that makes (stupid) assumptions about
what goes where.
/Mattias Wadenstein
Reply to: