On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 12:45:37PM -0400, Joe Ciccone wrote: > There is even a bigger problem with non-multilib builds. The way clfs > does it, all the 64bit libs go into /lib and such. FHS specifies ld.so > for 64bit x86_64 to be at /lib64/ld-linux-x86_64.so.2. If ld.so is in > /lib, all those nice 64 binary packages need to be modified or a > compatibility symlink has to be put in place. Plus a 64bit build will be > incapeable of running 32bit binaries, unless 32lib libraries are put on > the system somewhere, and /lib/ld-linux.so.2 knows where to look for them. > "all those nice 64 binary packages" - I suppose that means nvidia or ati kernel modules ? I don't know of anything else that comes as 64-bit without source.
Yeah, if people want to run binaries, they do need a multilib build. Personally, I'd rather have the discussion about where LFS should be going _after_ the holiday season. Hey, gcc-4.2 might even be working on ppc64 in clfs by then - although I doubt it ;) ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
