64bit iso

Auke Kok sofar at foo-projects.org
Tue Jan 2 16:36:01 CET 2007

Samuel Verstraete wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Dec 2006 07:32:10 -0800
> Auke Kok <sofar at foo-projects.org> wrote:
>> Samuel Verstraete wrote:
>>> Sofar,
>>> Is there any valid reason to have the lib64 > lib symlink ? I'm
>>> trying to solve the NVIDIA binary driver of 64 bit but that symlink
>>> seems to be a real pain. So how necessary is this? Who told you to
>>> have it? Any documentation on this?
>> the current system is not able to handle multilib, and NVIDIA does
>> not support a non-multilib setup. That's nvidia's problem, not mine,
>> it is trivially simple for them to make it work, but not for me.
> That was absolutely not the question... I just wanna know why it is
> there... i don't want you to create a multilib version... i wanna know
> why the symlink is there, as that is what the nvidia devs are asking me
> and i have absolutely no idea what it is doing there...

actually I have no clue why we need it, it's just that without it ld-linux.so.2 fails to 
start any executable at all, even if binutils was built properly. Only making the 
symlink works.


More information about the Lunar-dev mailing list