baho-utot at columbus.rr.com
Fri Nov 29 16:49:18 PST 2013
On 11/29/2013 07:23 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 11:35:19AM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Baho Utot wrote:
>>> Is it possible to build LFS-7.4 on x86_64 without the /lib64 symlink?
>>> I have tried to do so but libstd++ in the chapter 5 tool chain dies.
>>> I would like to build for x86_64 and have the same filesystem layout
>>> that i686 has ie without the lib64 directories
>> I really don't know but I can make some guesses. uname --machine gives
>> x86_64. I wouldn't be suprised if some packages that assume a multilib
>> system use that value to insist on /lib64 or /usr/lib64.
>> -- Bruce
> Cross-LFS has always done that for pure64. It's a _long_ while
> since I last built clfs x86_64-64 and many things have changed, but
> the main difference is that clfs still uses a specfile - their build
> is now quite different from how LFS has evolved.
> If you do something like that, then yes, a few _blfs_ packages will
> probably get confused by the absence of /lib64. OTOH, you would get
> a nice clean system - but the build for x86_64 will be somewhat
> different from what is currently in LFS.
> I've a feeling that someone, perhaps our late colleague Andy, used
> to build 64-bit LFS without the symlink - but I've no idea of the
> details about how to do it (and that was before libstdc++ and g++
> became required for building gcc, so the details would have to change
> for gcc-4.8).
> This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds.
The following packages are the only ones I have found ( in Chapter 5 )
that either puts something into or requires /lib64
I have not gotten to chapter 6
I have just downloaded clfs and I am building the books now. Once that
completes I will have a look at that to see how the x86_64 pure 64 bit
system is built. It looks like ( I could be wrong ) the /lib64 and
/usr/lib64 are not used there.
More information about the lfs-support