On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 6:15 AM, Michael E. Maher
<mich...@maheronline.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 07:53 +0200, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
>> >On Fri, 02 Aug 2013 19:52:19 -0700
>> >Bryan Kadzban <br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net> wrote:
>>
>> > Yeah, there are a few packages I've run into that do "if config.guess
>> > says something that looks like x86_64, use lib64".  Which is exactly
>> > the right thing to do for an x86_64 system, actually, but the standard
>> > autoconf macros don't set libdir that way.
>>
>> I know that standards are their own thing, but I personally REALLY
>> dislike lib64 directories. I have what is fundamentally x86_64 only
>> system (there is a x86 subsystem under /opt/linux32 ) and occationally
>> something installs something in some lib64 dir.
>>
>> The reason I don't want it is that not using it makes the operating
>> system architecture-agnostic, which is the way I believe a Unix system
>> should behave.
>>
>> I know that /lib64 was invented for multilib systems, but using it on
>> monolib systems is just plain wrong, in my humble opinion.
>>
>
> Just as a kinda off topic tangent for reference, you can, for glibc in
> any case, get rid of the lib64 dependency by passing something along the
> lines of:
>      ./configure --prefix=/tools \
>                  --libdir=/tools/lib \
>                  libc_cv_slibdir=/tools/lib ...
>
> I don't think it's a good idea to put it in the book, but for people
> playing around.

Not much out there even looks for the lib64 folder (I think the only
problem I had, was binary java, which wanted
/lib64/ld-library.so.x86_64).  For my own system, I just adjust those
programs that do that to install in /lib, or /usr/lib.


-- 
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

Reply via email to