From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:51271) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RKojt-0005bB-KH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 06:05:13 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RKojs-00073Y-Ek for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 06:05:09 -0400 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:60056) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RKojs-00073K-9W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 06:05:08 -0400 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RKojr-0004A8-Cv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 11:05:07 +0100 Received: from 93-34-199-98.ip51.fastwebnet.it ([93.34.199.98]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 11:05:07 +0100 Received: from pbonzini by 93-34-199-98.ip51.fastwebnet.it with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 11:05:07 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 11:04:26 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1319993519-865-1-git-send-email-smizrahi@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <1319993519-865-1-git-send-email-smizrahi@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Better support for distros using /lib64 directories List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 10/30/2011 05:51 PM, Saggi Mizrahi wrote: > Some distributions use lib64 directories for 64 bit libraries. Currently > configure would always generate libdir as $PREFIX/lib. By checking if > the current distro has a /lib64 directory we can assume it is using this > convention. This doesn't work if people compile a 32-bit version of QEMU. The right directory could be obtained with "gcc --print-multi-os-directory $CFLAGS", but I'm not sure whether it is a good thing to do. We should try to avoid gratuitous differences from Autoconf. The right thing to do would be to tweak the command-line supported by configure to the point that packagers can just use the same command-line that Autoconf uses (in RPM parlance that would be "%configure"). Paolo