Wouter Verhelst <wou...@debian.org> writes: > How can it do so, though, if the build system hardcodes paths to > binaries[1]? Isn't it better (and easier) to have non-usr-merged buildd > chroots as long as we still support such systems?
> [1] Yes, I know policy says you shouldn't do that, but if there's a > 3000-line upstream configure.ac file that does so all over the place, > fixing that might be involved, for questionable benefit (exaggerating > here, but you get the point). This was mentioned elsewhere in the thread, but just for the sake of clarity, Policy doesn't say that. Policy says only that maintainer scripts should not hard-code paths. Whether other binaries should or should not is a somewhat complicated question that is a little case-dependent. For instance, we decided in an earlier debian-devel thread that Perl and Python scripts should hard-code paths rather than using the env trick. This therefore makes your point even stronger. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
