| 1 |
On śro, 2017-08-02 at 21:02 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 03:25:01PM -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote |
| 3 |
> > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Martin Vaeth <martin@×××××.de> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Martin Vaeth <martin@×××××.de> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > > > If this already was discussed then sorry for the noise: |
| 7 |
> > > > > |
| 8 |
> > > > > What is the rationale for merging lib32 with lib? |
| 9 |
> > > > > Wouldn't it be somewhat cleaner to have a completely |
| 10 |
> > > > > split structure |
| 11 |
> > > > > |
| 12 |
> > > > > lib64 |
| 13 |
> > > > > lib32 |
| 14 |
> > > > > libx32 (possibly) |
| 15 |
> > > > > lib |
| 16 |
> > > > |
| 17 |
> > > > Here are a couple of reasons: |
| 18 |
> > > > |
| 19 |
> > > > 1. Other distros (notably Red Hat and Fedora) put 32-bit libs in "lib". |
| 20 |
> > > |
| 21 |
> > > According to bug 506276, Debian has instead merged 64-bit to lib. |
| 22 |
> > > So it seems to me that there is no "mainstream" to follow. |
| 23 |
> > > Perhaps striving for the cleanest solution would be the best? |
| 24 |
> > |
| 25 |
> > Debian puts 64-bit libs in /lib/(host), where (host) is something like |
| 26 |
> > x86_64-linux-gnu. They don't get put in /lib directly. They call this |
| 27 |
> > "multiarch". |
| 28 |
> > |
| 29 |
> > Migrating Gentoo to a "multiarch" config is a larger project. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> And what happens when 128-bit cpus debut? /lib128? |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Then we use whatever path is used in the appropriate ABI. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Best regards, |
| 37 |
Michał Górny |
Archives