On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:04:03 -0400 "+Jan" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Andrew Benton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > What would it take to compile a 64 bit system without the /lib > > => /lib64 symlink (i.e, with the libs installed into /lib and > > no /lib64)? Obviously, it works as it is, it just looks like an ugly > > hack. I'd much rather (for aesthetic reasons) do away with > > {/usr,}/lib64 if I could. > > > > > I did this on my last build of LFS a few months ago before my laptop's > charger decided to break down. It requires a fair bit of attention to make > sure your toolchain is built properly but once you get past GCC and Glibc > then most LFS packages build nicely. > > The real issue is when you run into a package that has specific case > scenario for detecting 64-bit. Some packages use their own code that makes > a lot of assumptions about multilib and the lib64 path. I'm going from > memory here but I remember one package having that issue in LFS, and I'm > certain you would run into other real world scenarios beyond a basic system. > > The solution to problems like these require a lot more effort than just > ignoring a lib64 symlink. Thanks for the reply. It's encouraging to know that it's doable. I may have some time next week to have a crack at it. Thanks! Andy -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
