Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 10:57 AM Valmor F. de Almeida wrote: > > USE="elogind alsa -multilib -multiarch -abi_x86_32" > > maybe I should have used this in package.use/nvidia-drivers > instead globally. Setting abi_x86_32 globally isn't really a big problem. I wouldn't go messing with multilib/multiarch unless you really know what you're doing. I suspect at some point having these modified globally is going to cause serious breakage. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
On 2/14/21 5:54 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 2:33 PM Valmor F. de Almeida wrote: Hello, I use the global flags USE="elogind alsa -multilib -abi_x86_32" and I thought this would prevent 32bit libraries to be installed. For example I have (from glibc) both: /usr/lib/libutil.so /usr/lib64/libutil.so In case you haven't already figured it out, glibc ignores the setting of abi_x86_32. It is controlled by your profile selection. Part of that might be legacy, but if you build glibc without lib32 support it is basically impossible to add it in later without bootstrapping it. If you don't want multilib then you can use a no-multilib profile. I ended up using: USE="elogind alsa -multilib -multiarch -abi_x86_32" but some libraries from glibc remain 32bit. My main goal was to remove 32bit libraries from libX11. This did happen since nvidia-drivers was installing the 32bit versions of libX11 if -multilib -abi_x86_32 were not used; maybe I should have used this in package.use/nvidia-drivers instead globally. Thanks for all the responses. -- Valmor
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
On February 15, 2021 4:15:43 AM PST, Peter Humphrey wrote: >On Sunday, 14 February 2021 21:48:36 GMT Frank Steinmetzger wrote: >> Am Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 12:51:30PM -0500 schrieb Jack: >> > As I remember, /lib and /usr/lib hold not only 32 bit libraries, >but >> > non-arch or arch-irrelevant (I know there's a better term) files. >> >> arch-agnostic? ;-) > >No, it should be arch-neutral. Agnosticism is about religion and has >nothing >to do with it. Technically "canonical" also only applies to religious texts. That doesn't keep us from using it descriptively in other areas. Bigger problem is that "arch agnostic" would mean only that the program is incapable of knowing what the arch was. Not that it can work with any arch or that the arch is irrelevant. So "independent" or "neutral" is a better choice in this context. LMP
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 3:17 AM Walter Dnes wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 06:09:58PM -0700, Grant Taylor wrote > > On 2/14/21 10:51 AM, Jack wrote: > > > I don't think you can completely get rid of it. > > > > My (long term) desire is to do away with /lib32 and /lib64, ultimately > > only using /lib. Likewise for the other library directories in /usr or > > wherever they are. I don't see a need for the specific bit variants in > > the future. > > How long before we see /lib and /lib64 *AND* /lib128 ? Well, anything is possible, but it seems unlikely. If it happens soon then chances are that multilib will still be a thing and so less stuff will break than when amd64 was introduced. If it happens in a century when we're all running no-multilib then we'll be reinventing the wheel. The main things that drove amd64 though were: * increasing the number of registers available * allowing direct access to >4GB of RAM (or a fraction of this depending on the OS design) I suspect the first is less of a concern these days - compilers generally only need so many registers and when instructions are added that need more register space they tend to come with registers to accommodate them. The second will be a concern when exabyte-scale data structures are common to work with. Note that current processors generally can't handle this much address space, but the amd64 instruction set itself can (I think), so the CPUs can continue to scale up. RAM capacity doesn't really seem to be increasing in recent years - I'm not sure if that is more market-driven or a technological limitation. RAM speed has improved somewhat, especially in niches like GPUs. Computers with 1GB of RAM were a thing in Y2K and today it is pretty uncommon for a standard desktop to have more than 8GB, and if you want to even cram more than about 128GB into a motherboard you start needing more enterprise-grade hardware. That isn't a very large increase in 20 years - doubling every 3 years (in terms of max capacity). We're using 37 bits today (on desktops), so at 3 years per bit that is another 80 years until we exhaust 64 bits, assuming that we continue to grow exponentially at the same rate. Though you do have to think about what use cases actually need that kind of working set. At 64-bit depth 300dpi 3D graphics would require 200MB/in^3, If you had a house-sized VR space (20k ft^3) rendered at that detail you'd need 7TB of RAM to store a frame of video, which is still only 50 bits. Maybe if you want a holodeck that 1000 people can play around in at once you'd run into the 64-bit limit (of course you'd have a ton of IO issues to fix long before then). So, that makes me wonder what the practical requirements are in order to implement The Matrix. :) Of course, if you're sticking people in it maybe you can borrow some of their own memory capacity and processing abilities to drive it. Kind of makes you wonder why you'd even need the human brains in the first place if you're able to deal with that kind of data in a simulation... -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
Peter, On Monday, 2021-02-15 12:15:43 +, you wrote: > ... > No, it should be arch-neutral. Agnosticism is about religion and has nothing > to do with it. First sentence: arch-independent? Second sentence: yep :-) Sincerely, Rainer
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
On Sunday, 14 February 2021 21:48:36 GMT Frank Steinmetzger wrote: > Am Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 12:51:30PM -0500 schrieb Jack: > > As I remember, /lib and /usr/lib hold not only 32 bit libraries, but > > non-arch or arch-irrelevant (I know there's a better term) files. > > arch-agnostic? ;-) No, it should be arch-neutral. Agnosticism is about religion and has nothing to do with it. -- Regards, Peter.
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 06:09:58PM -0700, Grant Taylor wrote > On 2/14/21 10:51 AM, Jack wrote: > > I don't think you can completely get rid of it. > > My (long term) desire is to do away with /lib32 and /lib64, ultimately > only using /lib. Likewise for the other library directories in /usr or > wherever they are. I don't see a need for the specific bit variants in > the future. How long before we see /lib and /lib64 *AND* /lib128 ? -- Walter Dnes I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
On 2/14/21 10:51 AM, Jack wrote: I don't think you can completely get rid of it. My (long term) desire is to do away with /lib32 and /lib64, ultimately only using /lib. Likewise for the other library directories in /usr or wherever they are. I don't see a need for the specific bit variants in the future. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 2:33 PM Valmor F. de Almeida wrote: > > > Hello, > I use the global flags USE="elogind alsa -multilib -abi_x86_32" and I > thought this would prevent 32bit libraries to be installed. > > For example I have (from glibc) both: > > /usr/lib/libutil.so > /usr/lib64/libutil.so > In case you haven't already figured it out, glibc ignores the setting of abi_x86_32. It is controlled by your profile selection. Part of that might be legacy, but if you build glibc without lib32 support it is basically impossible to add it in later without bootstrapping it. If you don't want multilib then you can use a no-multilib profile. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 17:12:11 -0500, Jack wrote: > Totally OT - if there is an arch-agnostic, is there an arch-atheistic? > Or would that be an abacus or paper and pencil? Or someone who only has rectangular doorways ;-) SCNR -- Neil Bothwick "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." (Albert Einstein) pgptUdAvAAOZj.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
On 2/14/21 4:48 PM, Frank Steinmetzger wrote: Am Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 12:51:30PM -0500 schrieb Jack: As I remember, /lib and /usr/lib hold not only 32 bit libraries, but non-arch or arch-irrelevant (I know there's a better term) files. arch-agnostic? ;-) Thanks. I think that's it. Totally OT - if there is an arch-agnostic, is there an arch-atheistic? Or would that be an abacus or paper and pencil?
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
Am Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 12:51:30PM -0500 schrieb Jack: > As I remember, /lib and /usr/lib hold not only 32 bit libraries, but > non-arch or arch-irrelevant (I know there's a better term) files. arch-agnostic? ;-) -- Gruß | Greetings | Qapla’ Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network. A neutron walks into a bar: “How much for a beer?” – “For you, no charge.” signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
On 2/14/21 12:22 AM, Grant Taylor wrote: On 2/13/21 9:38 PM, Dan Egli wrote: Frankly, I find there's still too many programs that want 32bit libraries to go full no-multilib. Are the programs that you're referring to things that are installed through something other than emerge? I'd naively assume that anything emerged on a system with no-multilib would be 64-bit. What am I missing? As I remember, /lib and /usr/lib hold not only 32 bit libraries, but non-arch or arch-irrelevant (I know there's a better term) files. Maybe they are not explicitly libraries, but things like perl, python, or shell scripts. I don't think you can completely get rid of it. I make no claim as to whether you could get rid of all 32 bit libraries.
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
On 2/13/21 9:38 PM, Dan Egli wrote: Frankly, I find there's still too many programs that want 32bit libraries to go full no-multilib. Are the programs that you're referring to things that are installed through something other than emerge? I'd naively assume that anything emerged on a system with no-multilib would be 64-bit. What am I missing? -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: [gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
I think there will always be some things that want /usr/lib. That said, I'm guessing you started with a no-multilib tarball? Frankly, I find there's still too many programs that want 32bit libraries to go full no-multilib. Maybe in a few more years as the last of the 32bit only machines die off and are replaced with 64 bit machines. On 2/13/2021 12:33 PM, Valmor F. de Almeida wrote: Hello, I use the global flags USE="elogind alsa -multilib -abi_x86_32" and I thought this would prevent 32bit libraries to be installed. For example I have (from glibc) both: /usr/lib/libutil.so /usr/lib64/libutil.so this causes problems with some packages outside portage that I would like to install. The install fails (or is incomplete) because it is trying to link a 32bit incompatible library, e.g.: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/9.3.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libutil.so when searching for -lutil Is there a way to have only /usr/lib64 in gentoo or is this not possible? I do use export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib64:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH in my shell startup file. Thanks for inputs. -- Valmor -- Dan Egli On my test server
[gentoo-user] why both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 on a 64bit system?
Hello, I use the global flags USE="elogind alsa -multilib -abi_x86_32" and I thought this would prevent 32bit libraries to be installed. For example I have (from glibc) both: /usr/lib/libutil.so /usr/lib64/libutil.so this causes problems with some packages outside portage that I would like to install. The install fails (or is incomplete) because it is trying to link a 32bit incompatible library, e.g.: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/9.3.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libutil.so when searching for -lutil Is there a way to have only /usr/lib64 in gentoo or is this not possible? I do use export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib64:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH in my shell startup file. Thanks for inputs. -- Valmor
