On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 10:48:10AM -0500, Olivier Cr?te wrote: > On Tue, 2005-29-11 at 15:27 +0000, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 10:18:05AM -0500, Olivier Cr?te wrote: > > > On Tue, 2005-29-11 at 14:53 +0000, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:23:54PM +0100, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten? > > > > wrote: > > > > > what's the official status of /usr/libexec directory? > > > > > > > > personally, i'd prefer if we moved all of /usr/libexec to /usr/lib/misc > > > > > > Why move the libexec content to libdir? They are all executables, not > > > libraries. Its in the same category as /usr/bin. > > > > libexec clutters /usr while /usr/lib/misc hides it nicely ... afterall, > > this are internal binaries that end user should never run themselves > > I was going to quote the FHS to prove you were wrong.... but it turns > out that libexec/ has been pull out of it. And they seem to recommend a > libdir subdirectory...
i know it, but i wasnt about to start quoting FHS on you :P i was hoping we could scrounge up better reasons before resorting to throwing spec files at each other > In the end it doesn't really matter, but if we > change from libexec to lib/misc.. which is why i havent really started a thread on the topic already > will need to modify a lot of gnome package at least. yeah, a bunch of packages will need to be tweaked slightly, but i dont think it should be a big deal to do ... -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
