Hi, On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 10:30:22AM +0000, Rob Kendrick wrote: > On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 09:38:03AM +0100, David Tardon wrote: >> Hi, >> >> this patch and the follow ups for libraries (only those I am interested >> in, sorry) make it much easier to build on typical Linux distributions, >> where 64-bit libs are put into /usr/lib64. > > What is typical? The idea of allowing where to put the libraries to be > more flexible is nice, but I've never used a Linux distribution that put > libraries for the running system anywhere other than in /usr/lib/ Theoretically, any distribution that follows FHS, e.g., Fedora / CentOS or SuSE. Debian and Ubuntu do not do that (I thought they did :-) and instead use more powerful multi-arch concept (see https://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/TheCaseForMultiarch), which puts libraries into architecture-specific subdirectories of /usr/lib, e.g., /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu. Gentoo seems to use /usr/lib for packages that do not support multilib and either /usr/lib64 or /usr/lib32 for those that do. Archlinux always puts native architecture libraries in /usr/lib, but on 64-bit system it allows 32-bit libraries in /usr/lib32.

On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 06:29:20PM +0100, François Revol wrote: > > Actually I'm on Debian unstable here, and it does have /usr/lib32 ... And possibly a lib64, a symlink to /lib :) They're there for compatibility with other systems.