[RFC] what to name linux 32-bit compat

Eric Wayte ewayte at pegasus.cc.ucf.edu
Tue Jan 18 11:36:19 PST 2005

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, David O'Brien wrote:

> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:41:01 -0800
> From: David O'Brien <obrien at freebsd.org>
> Reply-To: freebsd-amd64 at freebsd.org
> To: freebsd-amd64 at freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: [RFC] what to name linux 32-bit compat
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 12:38:18PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
>> We need to decide how to have both Linux i686 and Linux amd64 compat
>> support live side-by-side.  At the moment my leanings are for
>> /compat/linux32 and /compat/linux.  We could also go with /compat/linux
>> and /compat/linux64 <- taking a page from the Linux LSB naming convention
>> (ie, they have lib and lib64).
> kan (Alexander Kabaev) fealt we could probably just follow Red Hat
> Enterprise Linux - which would put both 32-bit and 64-bit bits under
> /compat/linux.  Upon thinking more about this; I think this will work.
> The linux32(1) command will be a little harder to impliment than seperate
> /compat/linux* (and I'm sure other details will have to be solved); but
> this does simplify things from a ports application POV.
> jhb agreed this was probably the better approach so I think this is what
> we'll do.
> -- 
> -- David  (obrien at FreeBSD.org)

A previous post mentioned having 64-bit Linux around for Oracle.  Why 
don't we follow their standard of /lib (/compat/linux) for 64-bit 
libraries and /lib32 (/compat/linux32) for the 32-bit libraries?  This is
how it's done on 64-bit Solaris anyway.

Eric Wayte
Univ. of Central Florida
ewayte at pegasus.cc.ucf.edu

More information about the freebsd-amd64 mailing list