[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Get rid of the lib64 dir?

On 04-May-08 16:29, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> Is there any reason why would we want to have a "lib64" dir on
> amd64?
> The way I see it, the only reason for lib64 is biarch.  I think
> it would make things easier for both pure64 and multiarch if we
> didn't have that lib64 dir.
> What do you people think about fixing all sources to get rid of
> the lib64 dirs for amd64?

I think this is a good idea. The implementation of the multiarch 
proposal will make lib64 obsolete anyway. Maybe '/lib64' has its place 
in a native 32bit system with 64bit alternative libraries as an 
addition. For a native 64bit system with possibly some 32bit libraries 
for legacy applications it would not make sense to install the native 
libraries in '/lib64' and the legacy libraries in '/lib'.

The only reason why we need 'lib64' in the 'pure64' port at the moment 
seems to be that the program interpreter is hard coded as 
'/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2' in binaries linked with libc6,
i.e. we have

# ldd /bin/ls
	/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 [...]

This could easily be changed to '/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2' or 
something else. However, as I understand it, the current 
FHS/LSB standards require the 64bit program interpreter to be in 
'/lib64'. But this will certainly change once the FHS and LSB 
implement the multiarch proposal. Maybe we should make a real 
'/lib64' directory (not a symlink to '/lib') with just a symlink to the 
program interpreter in it to conform with the standards - at least until 
the standards have been adapted to multiarch.

Andreas Jochens

P.S.: How is the 'pure64' upload to alioth working? I did not get any 
response to my application for membership in the debian-amd64 group.

Reply to: