| 1 |
On Tuesday 20 October 2009 16:47:50 Jonathan Callen wrote: |
| 2 |
> Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 3 |
> >> The problem was that Gentoo's early amd64 implementation predated this |
| 4 |
> >> standardization, and we had chosen the other way. While we've defaulted |
| 5 |
> >> to lib64 for 64-bit libs for years, it has never been considered |
| 6 |
> >> anything but experimental to break the lib --> lib64 link. AFAIK stable |
| 7 |
> >> baselayout still doesn't get its libdir usage consistent, putting files |
| 8 |
> >> in one but actually calling them using the other path, and boot breaks |
| 9 |
> >> in various frustrating ways if lib and lib64 are not the same directory. |
| 10 |
> >> Openrc gets it better now, but I'm not sure it's all fixed either -- it |
| 11 |
> >> certainly wasn't last time I tried breaking the link. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > your "AFAIK" isnt useful. there are no open bugs about either version |
| 14 |
> > and people assume that it's doing the right thing. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Personally, I do have a ~amd64 Gentoo chroot with LIBDIR_x86="lib". |
| 17 |
> There is only one place that I've found that it is still broken, namely |
| 18 |
> one line in toolchain.eclass (patch attached). I've been meaning to file |
| 19 |
> a bug for quite a while now, but never got around to it. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
off the top of my head, that doesnt really look like a correct fix. please |
| 22 |
open a bug with info on what you're actually doing. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
plus, your LIBDIR_x86 isnt really respected. there are places where |
| 25 |
lib32/lib64 are hardcoded when modifying gcc/binutils (patch or sed). |
| 26 |
-mike |
Archives