Hi, On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 10:30:22AM +0000, Rob Kendrick wrote: > On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 09:38:03AM +0100, David Tardon wrote: > > Hi, > > > > this patch and the follow ups for libraries (only those I am interested > > in, sorry) make it much easier to build on typical Linux distributions, > > where 64-bit libs are put into /usr/lib64. > > What is typical? The idea of allowing where to put the libraries to be > more flexible is nice, but I've never used a Linux distribution that put > libraries for the running system anywhere other than in /usr/lib/
Theoretically, any distribution that follows FHS, e.g., Fedora / CentOS or SuSE. Debian and Ubuntu do not do that (I thought they did :-) and instead use more powerful multi-arch concept (see https://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/TheCaseForMultiarch), which puts libraries into architecture-specific subdirectories of /usr/lib, e.g., /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu. Gentoo seems to use /usr/lib for packages that do not support multilib and either /usr/lib64 or /usr/lib32 for those that do. Archlinux always puts native architecture libraries in /usr/lib, but on 64-bit system it allows 32-bit libraries in /usr/lib32. Note that this is mostly pretty old stuff: I remember /usr/lib64 being used in Fedora 8 6 years ago. I have not checked any other distributions, but I hope this is compelling enough to show that the extra abstraction is needed. D.
