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

[Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>]

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