Re: [gentoo-dev] /usr/libexec vs /usr/lib(32|64)/misc

["Olivier Crête" <tester@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1187 bytes --]

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... In the end it doesn't really matter, but if we
change from libexec to lib/misc.. will need to modify a lot of gnome
package at least.


https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2005-May/msg00240.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/05/msg00401.html

-- 
Olivier Crête
tester@gentoo.org

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]