Thinking forward LFS-7.0

+Jan jonathan.oksman at
Wed Mar 16 06:04:03 PDT 2011

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Andrew Benton <b3nton at> wrote:

> What would it take to compile a 64 bit system without the /lib
> => /lib64 symlink (i.e, with the libs installed into /lib and
> no /lib64)? Obviously, it works as it is, it just looks like an ugly
> hack. I'd much rather (for aesthetic reasons) do away with
> {/usr,}/lib64 if I could.
I did this on my last build of LFS a few months ago before my laptop's
charger decided to break down.  It requires a fair bit of attention to make
sure your toolchain is built properly but once you get past GCC and Glibc
then most LFS packages build nicely.

The real issue is when you run into a package that has specific case
scenario for detecting 64-bit.  Some packages use their own code that makes
a lot of assumptions about multilib and the lib64 path.  I'm going from
memory here but I remember one package having that issue in LFS, and I'm
certain you would run into other real world scenarios beyond a basic system.

The solution to problems like these require a lot more effort than just
ignoring a lib64 symlink.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list