Why /lib64 instead of /lib/x86_64?
Alexandre Oliva
aoliva at redhat.com
Mon Feb 9 18:55:20 UTC 2004
On Feb 8, 2004, florian_bachmann at t-online.de (Florian Bachmann) wrote:
> Gene C. wrote:
>> On Sunday 08 February 2004 11:08, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>>
>>> The subject says it all. /lib64 doesn't feel right. Why add another root
>>> directory? We already have /lib/i686, so /lib/x86_64 seems natural.
>>>
>>> Ditto for /usr/lib64. /usr/lib/x86_64 looks better to me.
>> IIRC, /usr/lib64 and /lib64 are "standard" for 64 bit systems .. not
>> just the x86_64. So on a Sparc, Itanium or the IBM z/Architecture,
>> you have 64 bit libraries in /usr/lib64 also.
> Same on IRIX on SGI workstations.
And mips64-linux, FWIW. And also on ppc64. But not on alpha, even
though it is a 64-bit platform.
The difference is that all but alpha have a legacy, partially
compatible 32-bit userland that had already taken /lib, and most
people want to be able to run their legacy applications on the 64-bit
systems. /lib64 is the natural way to overcome this issue: just use a
new directory for the 64-bit userland libs. Of course it could have
been /lib/64 or anything else, but following existing practice is
generally easier.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Happy GNU Year! oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer
More information about the test
mailing list