On Tuesday 10 May 2005 15:02, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Chris Ricker wrote:
FWIW, what little can be found about libexec in FHS discussion archives at sourceforge suggests that libexec has been deliberately excluded in the past on the grounds of not really serving a purpose....
It was included in an old version of FHS at the urging of the BSD folks. It seems to have added no value, so I guess it was removed; it definitely broke the lib/lib64 bit too.
Why do you believe that it broke the lib/lib64 bit?
AFAIK no-one has ever tested Postfix with parts of it running as 32bit and parts running as 64bit. Running it in such a manner seems likely to expose the user to previously undiscovered bugs while not providing any benefit that I can determine.
If you wanted Postfix to load shared objects of different word sizes in different sub-processes then you would have a challenging task to determine which Postfix program loads which shared objects.
Please give me an example of a program which has sub-processes that can run with different word sizes.
Who the **** is talking about Postfix?
That being said, my point was that there doesn't seem to be any 32/64 separation for libexec, *and* it never made sense in the first place (it was only added for bug-compatibility with BSD), so that's presumably why it was removed.
-hpa
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
