[arch-dev-public] final leg of /lib removal

Thomas Bächler thomas at archlinux.org
Tue Jul 3 12:11:16 EDT 2012

Am 03.07.2012 18:05, schrieb Dave Reisner:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 05:48:43PM +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote:
>> Am 03.07.2012 17:41, schrieb Dave Reisner:
>>> BIG SCARY NOTE: Due to the kmod changes, this will BREAK all module
>>> tools for users with their own kernels. If you do not rebuild your
>>> kernel after pulling in the new kmod, you're going to have a bad time.
>>> See the paste link above for inspiration.
>> This worries me, a lot. Can't we get a smoother upgrade path?
> Not really.
> We could patch all things using kmod (udev and kmod's tools) to look
> in both /usr/lib as well as /lib, but that's ugly and doesn't really do
> us any good.
> We could make this rebuild coincide with the glibc rebuild to get rid of
> /lib, but you can't install glibc with /lib as a symlink until
> /lib/modules doesn't exist. The only way /lib/modules doesn't exist is
> if people with custom kernels rebuild them into /usr/lib/modules.


Why do we want /lib as a symlink to /usr/lib anyway? You could have the
directory /lib, only containing the symlinks for ld-linux.so.2 ->
/usr/lib/ld-linux.so.2 and ld-linux-x86_64.so.2 ->
/usr/lib/ld-linux-x86_64.so.2 (and, of course
/lib64/ld-linux-x86_64.so.2 for compatibility).

I don't see any advantage in having the symlink /lib -> /usr/lib, except
a harder upgrade path where so many things could go wrong.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20120703/e177bd2a/attachment.asc>

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list