On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 10:57:20PM +0100, Javier Serrano Polo wrote: > El dc 24 de 01 de 2018 a les 22:40 +0100, Sven Joachim va escriure: > > Well, then you have to live with /lib64. > > I do not live with /lib64. You do not have to live with /lib64 unless > you want to.
That path is baked into every single x86-64 binary compiled by any compiler that builds for the well-defined GNU/Linux x86-64 ABI. You are free to patch all your compilers and your libc to build a system that works differently, but you won't be ABI-compatible with the rest of the Linux world, and it's nonsensical to expect Debian to make it easy to build such a non-compatible system. I've spent a lot of time dealing with ld.so paths upstream, and we all agree that, given a time machine, we'd fix them all to be in /lib and have unique names (see armhf or arm64 for examples), but while we can change future ABIs, it's just not feasible to change an ABI that has been in heavy use for well over a decade. I appreciate that you think having a directory with one file in it is ugly. If you want to patch your local system and rebuild it all to avoid that, go nuts. Seems like overkill, but who am I to judge? As a Debian bug, however, even a wishlist one, this should be a wontfix. ... Adam
