From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QE5K6-0002JA-RF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 19:50:27 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D115B1C074; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 19:50:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F94E1C012 for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 19:49:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (77-253-26-88.adsl.inetia.pl [77.253.26.88]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1932A1B4002; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 19:49:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 21:49:47 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: zzam@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: libexec directory inconsistency Message-ID: <20110424214947.469feebf@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <201104242143.17576.zzam@gentoo.org> References: <20110122170242.GA17407@linux1> <1295724372.2648.92.camel@raven.home.flameeyes.eu> <201104242143.17576.zzam@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.24.3; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/4=w+9iNGSuWPhpk.VqfOw4C"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 6fb17f6a98ae6e10a0aee36585556014 --Sig_/4=w+9iNGSuWPhpk.VqfOw4C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 21:43:16 +0200 Matthias Schwarzott wrote: > Sounds like we should fix udev ebuild and some ebuilds installing > udev rules to not use /$(get_libdir)/udev, but plain /lib/udev. >=20 > I used that in believe that /lib is identical or links > to /$(get_libdir) and multilib-strict requires it, but it seems to be > intelligent enough to only deny 64-bit libs to go to /lib. >=20 > So proper udev should use /lib/udev, correct? Do you really think it'd be fine for some systems to possibly have /lib64 and /lib with random different contents? --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/4=w+9iNGSuWPhpk.VqfOw4C Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk20fuEACgkQnGSe5QXeB7uI7wCgwI4bJCd2uWaBW8xoJiXsLnPU SnkAoIuXaWvlEHXeZbd0y72H/VFfsOB1 =cT0j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/4=w+9iNGSuWPhpk.VqfOw4C--