Andrey Rahmatullin <w...@wrar.name> writes: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:39:22AM +0100, Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr wrote: >> >> >> I am packaging some older software (eso-midas, [1]) that installs >> >> >> everything into a common directory (f.e. /usr/lib/eso-midas/). However, >> >> >> the FHS requires that this should be split between /usr/share/ and >> >> >> /usr/lib/<arch>/. >> >> > Nothing forbids you from putting arch-indep files into /usr/lib. >> >> >> >> FHS does: "Miscellaneous architecture-independent application-specific >> >> static files and subdirectories must be placed in /usr/share." [1] >> > Do we enforce this? >> >> "9.1.1 File System Structure >> >> The location of all files and directories must comply with the >> Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS), version 2.3, with the exceptions >> noted below, and except where doing so would violate other terms of >> Debian Policy. [...]" [2] >> >> I would interpret this as: Yes, we do. > I mean do we check this in e.g. lintian. I also wonder if finding an > arch-indep file in /usr/lib should result in an RC bug.
>From the BTS documentation [1]: | The severity levels are: | [...] | serious | | is a severe violation of Debian policy (roughly, it violates a | "must" or "required" directive), or, in the package maintainer's or | release manager's opinion, makes the package unsuitable for release. | | [...] | Certain severities are considered release-critical, [...] | Currently, these are critical, grave and serious. Since the Policy 9.1.1 states (see above) "... *must* comply with the FHS", I would assume that the current agreement is that an arch-independent file in /usr/lib/ is an RC bug. When this was not the intention, it should be clarified in the policy (or the BTS docs). Best regards Ole [1] https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/ytz61nmyv4u....@news.ole.ath.cx
