Dnia 2015-10-10, o godz. 17:48:15 William Hubbs <[email protected]> napisał(a):
> All, > > fhs 3.0 was approved in June this year [1] [2]. > > The piece of it that I want to bring up is the lib and libxx > directories, both in / and /usr. The way I read the fhs, /lib and > /usr/lib should hold the files for the default abi and /libxx and > /usr/libxx should hold the files for the alternate abis. In earlier fhs, > there was an exception for amd64 which stated that the default libraries > should be in /lib64 and /usr/lib64. However, that exception is now gone. Which only proves we ended up with yet another broken, pointless spec that's missing the point and can't be implemented sanely. I don't see a point discussing it further. > I know there was discussion/work in the past on removing the lib->lib64 > symlinks on amd64, but I don't remember what happened to that > discussion. So, I would like to bring it up again and get the info. > > What would it take for us to remove the lib->lib64 links? > > What would it take for us to do this migration on live systems? vapier was working on it but it would probably involve lot more politics than we can handle right now. He's got some script to fix live systems but it is a quite dangerous operation by design, so I'm not convinced we really want to play with live systems like that. > [1] https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/en/FHS > [2] http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_3.0/fhs-3.0.html -- Best regards, Michał Górny <http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>
pgpZ0mapz4i9n.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
