| 1 |
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Martin Vaeth <martin@×××××.de> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> What are your thoughts? |
| 5 |
> |
| 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 |
2. The path to the 32-bit runtime linker (/lib/ld-linux.so.2) is |
| 21 |
hard-coded in every x86 binary on your system. |
Archives