On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Andrew Haley <aph@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > On 09/09/14 21:04, Shaun Jackman wrote: >> I understand lib64 has a vital purpose on a multilib system. On a >> non-multilib system, it seems odd to me to have a populated lib64 >> directory and an empty lib directory. It's tidier (in my opinion) to >> just name the directory lib. > > Sure, but it's nonstandard. You should just do what Debian do, and > symlink lib and lib64. Isn't each and every system potentially a multilib one? There are commercial solutions (I worked on one not so long ago) providing only 32-bit versions of software where providing 64-bit is for some reason not possible at the moment (we were forced to provide 32-bit binary due to difficulties with one of external libraries - it was quite big, we had no way to replace it and 64-bit version is "right around the corner" for a few years now). This means that at some point one might be forced to install 32-bit libc and so on. -- Jędrzej Dudkiewicz I really hate this damn machine, I wish that they would sell it. It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it.
