Re: there is /usr/lib64 symlink but no /usr/local/lib64

2011-02-15 Thread Vincent Lefevre
On 2011-02-12 17:44:27 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > How do we square that with the FHS, then? The FHS says: > > If directories /lib or /usr/lib exist, the equivalent > directories must also exist in /usr/local. > > That seems to require /usr/local/lib64 even if we *don't* include > /usr/li

Re: there is /usr/lib64 symlink but no /usr/local/lib64

2011-02-13 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
]] Steve Langasek | That seems to require /usr/local/lib64 even if we *don't* include | /usr/lib64, right? Should we amend policy to take this exception to the | FHS? Please open a bug report on policy if you think we should. I've just opened such a bug. | /me goes back to making lib64 obsole

Re: there is /usr/lib64 symlink but no /usr/local/lib64

2011-02-12 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 07:02:33PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > ]] Yaroslav Halchenko > | please do not slap me too hard (only so that I feel your warm carrying > | touch): > | is there a rationale for: on amd64 Debian systems having > | /lib64 -> /lib > Yes, it's required by the ABI, unfor

Re: there is /usr/lib64 symlink but no /usr/local/lib64

2011-02-11 Thread Vincent Lefevre
On 2011-02-04 19:02:33 +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > ]] Yaroslav Halchenko > | /usr/lib64 -> /usr/lib > > Not really, apart from some broken software that will look for stuff > there and be confused if it doesn't exist. I think we should drop it. Thanks would be a good thing. Otherwise users

Re: there is /usr/lib64 symlink but no /usr/local/lib64

2011-02-04 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
]] Yaroslav Halchenko | please do not slap me too hard (only so that I feel your warm carrying | touch): | | is there a rationale for: on amd64 Debian systems having | | /lib64 -> /lib Yes, it's required by the ABI, unfortunately. | /usr/lib64 -> /usr/lib Not really, apart from some broken s

Re: there is /usr/lib64 symlink but no /usr/local/lib64

2011-02-04 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
I guess then it might be sensible to get /usr/local/lib64 -> /usr/local/lib . ok -- lets see what libc6 maintainers think about that http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=612000 On Fri, 04 Feb 2011, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > aren't we diverging from FHS: > > If directories /li

Re: there is /usr/lib64 symlink but no /usr/local/lib64

2011-02-04 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Yaroslav Halchenko writes: > please do not slap me too hard (only so that I feel your warm carrying > touch): > > is there a rationale for: on amd64 Debian systems having > > /lib64 -> /lib > /usr/lib64 -> /usr/lib > > but no similar one for /usr/local/lib64, so that directory > /usr/local/lib64

there is /usr/lib64 symlink but no /usr/local/lib64

2011-02-03 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
please do not slap me too hard (only so that I feel your warm carrying touch): is there a rationale for: on amd64 Debian systems having /lib64 -> /lib /usr/lib64 -> /usr/lib but no similar one for /usr/local/lib64, so that directory /usr/local/lib64 gets created if anyone (with enough rights) do