* Gunnar Wolf (gwolf@gwolf.cx) wrote: > Being it that way, and being me a stubborn, if in the long run 32-bit > support will cease being important, why not targetting at > standardness(?) and avoid the lib64 thing? I know, as you told me, > that it's the way RH and SuSE went - but that does not make it > right. It is a de-facto thing, not a standard. If anything, it should > be lib32, because the 32-bitness is the one that in the future might > be deprecated/rare. /lib should remain /lib, even more if (unlike > Sparc) the default, optimum mode is 64 bit. The argument against that is that it might break some commercial apps, some non-free apps, and some Debian programs that brokenly use rpath. You'll also need a symlink if you expect to run i386.deb binaries directly. If you want to be LSB compatible you'll need a /lib64 with a symlink there too, apparently. I don't know if anyone actually put any thought into that decision though. Can we deal with that? Personally, I think so, and it would give some hope to having an amd64 system this year. Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature