Michal Hrusecky wrote:
Linda Walsh - 11:08 30.07.12 wrote:
Michal Hrusecky wrote:
Linda Walsh - 12:25 28.07.12 wrote:
Nelson Marques wrote:
Ever heard of FHS? It's stands for Filesystem Hierarchy Standard.
Enjoy the reading :)
It is based on really screwed up reasoning. Why was it accepted?
Regardless, Suse doesn't follow it now, so why not move ahead with a more soundly reasoned solution. AFAIK, we follow it, do you have any counterexample?
I gave a bunch of statistics 35% of the binaries in bin are 64bit. bin contains only 25% of the overall packages, so only 20% of the libraries in lib & lib64 are 32-bit. The rest are 64-bit. The original reasoning was continued and widespread usage of 32-bit programs.
I was asking for examples where we do not follow FHS ;-) By putting 64-bit native programs in the native /usr/lib directory.
The FHS says they belong in the /lib64 directory Why the intermix 32 and 64 bit programs though is a bit odd... I doubt that standard 64-bit programs are supposed to link with /usr/lib either, though most do -- I'll often see messages about the linking ignoring incompatible libraries in lib -- a 64-bit build should look in the 64-bit dirs first... The problem, is that the majority of programs have to be modified to fit the FHS, while the minority of legacy programs that would work equally well in a 32-bit root, push the native apps out of place. This despite their putting IA64 libraries in /usr/lib (despite Intel including i386) compatible options with their IA64's .. But it wasn't native there either. So why x86_64? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org