On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:23:54 +0100 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| little question (that could start up a flame): what's the official
| status of /usr/libexec directory?
libexec for stuff that's run is far tidier than weird subdirectories
in /usr/lib*. Those old people wit
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 10:48:10AM -0500, Olivier Cr?te wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-29-11 at 15:27 +, 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 +, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:23:54PM +010
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 04:41:20PM +0100, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:27:10 +
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > i know they are executables, that's why we're talking about a
> > specific subdir of lib
> >
> > libexec clutters /usr while /usr/lib
On Tue, 2005-29-11 at 15:27 +, 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 +, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:23:54PM +0100, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten? wrote:
> > > > what's the official status
On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:27:10 +
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i know they are executables, that's why we're talking about a
> specific subdir of lib
>
> libexec clutters /usr while /usr/lib/misc hides it nicely ...
> afterall, this are internal binaries that end user should never
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 10:18:05AM -0500, Olivier Cr?te wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-29-11 at 14:53 +, 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 m
On Tue, 2005-29-11 at 14:53 +, 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 t
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:23:54PM +0100, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten? wrote:
> what's the official status of /usr/libexec directory?
there is none afaik ... it's something we've been leaving alone for
the time being because it hasnt been that critical of an issue
personally, i'd prefer if we moved
Hi all,
little question (that could start up a flame): what's the official status
of /usr/libexec directory?
I was told on IRC time ago to prefer /usr/$(get_libdir)/misc to libexec
because that's already ABI-specified... but I'm not really sure.
/usr/libexec is already used by many upstream pack
