On May 17 2023, Andrea Pappacoda <and...@pappacoda.it> wrote: > Hi all, > > first of all thank you for this great thread. While I could feel some tension > while > reading it, it's completely normal and I've learned a lot. > > I have a question though: if /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 is already a symlink > on > non-merged-/usr systems, pointing to > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, why would > it be an issue to have /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 point to > /usr/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2?
I don't think it would be, and I don't think anyone else is saying it would be. > Why do we want binaries to look for the loader in > /usr/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 if that would still be a symlink to > /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2? My understanding is that there is a desire for the /lib64 symlink not to be needed, because it would simplify bootstrapping new systems. Best, Nikolaus -- GPG Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F
