* Goswin von Brederlow (brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de) wrote: > Kurt Roeckx <Q@ping.be> writes: > > Is there any reason why would we want to have a "lib64" dir on > > amd64? > > Its the standard dir for any 64bit library on amd64. (As set in the > FSH, multiarch proposals and the major linux distributions [Debian, > SuSe and RH]). Erm, the latest multiarch proposal for Debian doesn't use lib64, thankfully. It's a broken idea to begin with, really. > > What do you people think about fixing all sources to get rid of > > the lib64 dirs for amd64? > > Its a very bad idea since we would loose compatibilty with other linux > distributions and with upstream sources. > > We had this discussion in the past and we pretty much all agreed that > /lib64 is ugly. But there is nothing we can do about it short of > getting the FSH and everyone else changed. Its a bit late in the game > to change it. That doesn't mean we have to really use it. In fact, we're not intending to, we'll put a symlink in there for compatibility with FHS and company since that's the path for the linker. That's it though. Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature