On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Andrew Benton <b3n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:04:03 -0400
> "+Jan" <jonathan.oks...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Andrew Benton <b3n...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > What would it take to compile a 64 bit system without the /lib
> > > => /lib64 symlink (i.e, with the libs installed into /lib and
> > > no /lib64)? Obviously, it works as it is, it just looks like an ugly
> > > hack. I'd much rather (for aesthetic reasons) do away with
> > > {/usr,}/lib64 if I could.
> > >
> > >
> > I did this on my last build of LFS a few months ago before my laptop's
> > charger decided to break down. It requires a fair bit of attention to
> make
> > sure your toolchain is built properly but once you get past GCC and Glibc
> > then most LFS packages build nicely.
>
> Any chance you could give me a clue how you got gcc to install
> into /usr/lib and not /usr/lib64?
>
sed -i -e 's@/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2@/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2@g' \
gcc/config/i386/linux64.h &&
echo "MULTILIB_OSDIRNAMES = ../lib ../lib/32" >> gcc/config/i386/t-linux64
(I use 64bit in /lib, and 32bit in /lib/32, but can be adapted for your
purposes)
> Andy
> --
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
> Unsubscribe: See the above information page
>
--
Nathan Coulson (conathan)
------
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Timezone: PST (-8)
Webpage: http://www.nathancoulson.com
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
