[Fedora-packaging] How important is %{_libdir} to arch-specific but non-multilib packages

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Nov 14, 2012 10:36 AM, "Rex Dieter" <rdieter at math.unl.edu> wrote:
>
> Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>
> > So what are thoughts on allowing both 32bit and 64bit binaries into
> > %{_prefix}/lib if those binaries are not part of a package that will be
> > %multilib'd?
>
> Personally, the more i think about it, the more it feels right and makes
> sense to allow this.  In essence, one can consider non-multilib'd
> %_prefix/lib and %_libexecdir content to be equal policy-wise.
>

I've thought of one technical thing that is lost if we allow this but it
may not be that important.  Currently a sysadmin could install packages on
an x86 and then mount the /usr/lib directory on both x86 and x86_64
systems.  This is similar to the rationale the FHS uses for splitting
/usr/share/ from %{_libdir}.  It isn't in the FHS, though, so we aren't
required to to keep this feature.

-*Toshio*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/attachments/20121115/62a7b82f/attachment.html>