Hello Aurelien, On 06-May-19 04:15, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > [Ccing: amd64 and dpkg developers as they are concerned by this subject] > Currently the (/usr)/lib64 -> /lib symlink is shipped in the libc6 > package. Goswin von Brederlow asked for this link to be created in the > postinst instead, so that packages could install files in both > (/usr)/lib and (/usr)/lib64 directories. > > > Could you please give me your opinion on that, so that I can take a > decision?
please do not change the status quo regarding the lib64 symlinks. During the porting of Debian to amd64 quite a few alternatives regarding the lib64 issue were discussed and tested. The biarch approach with /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 as two different directories failed badly. > I have concerns about that: > - I don't really want to add something specific to amd64 in postinst. > But ok, that's not an argument. > - I am not sure that creating the link in postinst will work. Creating > it in preinst looks safer to me. > - If you can install files in (/usr)/lib64, the files will end up in > (/usr)/lib. And dpkg won't know anything about them. dpkg -S and other > tools won't work correctly. > - If you have two packages providing the same files in (/usr)/lib and > (/usr)/lib64, then the files will be overwritten without warning. This > is IMHO not acceptable. I share these concerns. The current policy which requires all packages to install native amd64 libraries in /usr/lib is simple and sane. This should not be changed. Anything which makes it easier to violate this simple policy will lead to a mixed usage of /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 and consequently to problems which could be difficult to disentangle later. This is just my personal opinion. Regards Andreas Jochens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]