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