Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think you may be reading too much into the word "large". The complete
> paragaph:
>
> No large package (such as TeX and GNU Emacs) should use a direct
> subdirectory of /usr. Instead, there should be a subdirectory within
> /usr/lib (or /usr/local/lib if it was installed completely locally) for
> the purpose. An exception is made for the X Window System because of
> considerable precedent and widely-accepted practice.
Indeed, and if you note the last point, the X Window System is excepted due
to "considerable precedent and widely-accepted practice." I'd say the same
is true of cross compiling environments.
Generally though, I agree with the FSSTND that a direct subdirectory under
/usr for a package is undesirable.
> it may contain a directory or not. I think it's clear that the authors of the
> FSSTND would object to at 72k /usr/debhelper/ just as much as they would to
> a /usr/emacs/. If you open the door to /usr/<arch>, you're opening the door
> to a whole lot more..
Not really, you can hardly argue that debhelper has considerable precedent,
and widely-accepted practice, except within the Debian project. :)
> Why not just contact the FSSTND authors for a clarification?
Rather than do this, I think it would be more productive to ensure that
the next revision, the FHS, says something on this issue.
Martin.
