Summary/Minutes for today's FESCo meeting (2012-12-19)

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 12/21/2012 01:15 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 04:05:36PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> As I said in the meeting, libexec is somewhat of a red herring here.  The
>> packaging guidelines already allow substituting subdirs of %_libdir for
>> %_libexecdir.  What's in question is being able to use /usr/lib for arch
>> specific 64bit binaries on 64 bit multilib enabled boxes.
>
> Make /usr/lib be the native arch location on all systems, and put any 32-bit
> libs in /usr/lib32 on 64-bit systems. Problem solved!


The subdirectories being used for multi-archs can more or less be 
arbitrarily choosen.

Fedora/RH once have chosen "../lib" and "../lib64"
Ubuntu/Debian seem to have chosen "../lib32" and "../lib64" and seem to 
be using /usr/lib for "primary" arch.

As a side-effect of this choice, Ubuntu/Debian have separate directories 
for "multi-arched" directories, and a non-multi-arched, "primary-arched" 
/usr/lib, while Fedora only has multi-arched subdir and a 
non-multi-arched /usr/lib.

That said, Fedora actually doesn't have a notion of "primary-arch". The 
issues we are discussing here actually are cludges to press works, which 
didn't take such a strict separation into account rsp. which rely on a 
"primary arch", into Fedora.

Ralf