Hi, for years I've been leaving default 'lib32' option during initial install of FreeBSD selected, but now I am experimenting with a server which will be 64-bit only. I have noticed that, after initial install of FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE without lib32 selected, /usr/lib32 folder is created nevertheless, containing 3 empty dirs: dtrace, i18n and private. However, running freebsd-update on such system pulls a bunch of files into /usr/lib32 and its subdirs while updating to FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE-p5. Are those files really necessary on 64-bit only system? Thank you in advance. -- Marko Cupa? https://www.mimar.rs
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Marko Cupa? <marko.cupac at mimar.rs> wrote:> Hi, > > for years I've been leaving default 'lib32' option during initial > install of FreeBSD selected, but now I am experimenting with a server > which will be 64-bit only. > > I have noticed that, after initial install of FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE > without lib32 selected, /usr/lib32 folder is created nevertheless, > containing 3 empty dirs: dtrace, i18n and private. However, running > freebsd-update on such system pulls a bunch of files into /usr/lib32 > and its subdirs while updating to FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE-p5. > > freebsd-update lists what it thinks you have installed, so if it listslib32 it will be populated. The detection of what is installed is sometimes not good enough, so then one has to specify dists in /etc/freebsd-update.conf Are those files really necessary on 64-bit only system?> > Thank you in advance. > -- > Marko Cupa? > https://www.mimar.rsBest regards Andreas
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Marko Cupa? <marko.cupac at mimar.rs> wrote:> I have noticed that, after initial install of FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE > without lib32 selected, /usr/lib32 folder is created nevertheless, > containing 3 empty dirs: dtrace, i18n and private. However, running > freebsd-update on such system pulls a bunch of files into /usr/lib32 > and its subdirs while updating to FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE-p5. > > Are those files really necessary on 64-bit only system? >There was a glitch in production of 10.1-R that left lib32 mostly empty by default, and -p1 attempted to fix it. I suspect both the original bug and the fix ignored the lib32 setting. -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allbery.b at gmail.com ballbery at sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net
On 31/01/2015 00:20, Marko Cupa? wrote:> Hi, > > for years I've been leaving default 'lib32' option during initial > install of FreeBSD selected, but now I am experimenting with a server > which will be 64-bit only. > > I have noticed that, after initial install of FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE > without lib32 selected, /usr/lib32 folder is created nevertheless, > containing 3 empty dirs: dtrace, i18n and private. However, running > freebsd-update on such system pulls a bunch of files into /usr/lib32 > and its subdirs while updating to FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE-p5.Doing a buildworld WITHOUT_LIB32 still creates these dirs. I reported it a while back but it is still on someones todo list. Not sure if that is also related to freebsd-update or is the cause of it triggering the lib32 install. https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165175> Are those files really necessary on 64-bit only system?No they aren't needed, you can delete /usr/lib32 without any problems. I have been deleting it for a few years now without issue. In fact deleting it may fix some port builds, such as older versions of valgrind tested for lib32 to determine if it builds 32bit libs and failed if lib32 was empty, the new version now has an option for 32bit. I just keep `rm -R /usr/lib32` as a step in my notes on updating. -- FreeBSD - the place to B...Software Developing Shane Ambler