-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
reassign 33251 debian-policy
thanks
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 01:05:32AM -1000, Brian Russo wrote:
>> wouldn't it make more sense to put it in /usr/lib/${arch}/
>> or /usr/${arch}/lib ?
>>
>> That way its easy to look under each arch and see whats installed
>> etc.
>> also it will help people who run large sites, and NFS, etc stuff.
>
>There seems to be some confusion about what this directory contains.
>
>The directory /usr/${arch} contains for cross compilation purposes
>1. binaries used for cross compilation (gcc etc) in bin
>2. header files used for compilation
>3. libraries used for compilation
>
>2+3 can be symlinked into the actual root filesystem of the system you build
>for. Files in 1 are symlinked to the actually symlinks to
>/usr/bin/${arch}-gcc etc on my systems.
>
>It makes perfectly sense for them to be in /usr/${arch}, or even in
>/${arch}. You can for example put /usr/${arch}/bin in your path and all
>build tools will cross build by default (I am not sure this is a good idea,
>though, as it defeats native builds of helper programs).
So - reassigning the lintian bug about this to policy.
Am I right in taking from the above that /usr/${arch} is essentially a
miniature mirror of the /usr filesystem? They certainly seem to have
similar structures. Thus, /usr/lib/${arch} or /usr/${arch}/lib or
whatever seems incorrect, and something at the same level as /usr/local
makes sense.
I propose that we should override the FHS on this one. This is exactly
the reason we maintain the flexibility to do so.
- --
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE6pWbqMVrRHkkXpRQRAnRlAJ4xlmTEh0Ukai+ls/YSJO+LUsCB9QCgi6LV
fP/Cpx15srIqbgodZGzt+Io=
=2hO6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
