On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 07:27:02AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > >> Also, should Gentoo (Linux) never break with tradition even if > > >> somethings are better elsewhere? > > > no, there is no "innovation" here nor any incentive to do so. i also > > > personally dont believe in /usr/libexec/, so i'm not going to randomly be > > > convinced by /libexec/ in the meantime. > > The "innovation" here being shell scripts and text files are not 32/64 > > bit dependent and thus don't belong in a directory clearly marked as such. > ABI is really not the driving force behind libexec vs lib, nor does it really > matter here. openrc isnt a multilib package nor does it need to be. Even while it isn't a multilib package, there's precedent to move stuff out of /lib (/usr/lib etc).
One of the reasons to move stuff OUT of /lib are all the profiles where
SYMLINK_LIB is disabled AND LIBDIR_${arch} != "lib". On non-multilib
systems (so there is no lib23/64) or multilib systems where /lib is the
correct location, then any test against /lib/rc/version would be fine.
On anything else, it's not.
Having it in a different location from upstream (OpenRC), means that any
other distributions using OpenRC's /libexec/rc/version location would
need to patch all their init.d scripts.
vapier: I take it by this entire discussion that you aren't going take
the rest of OpenRC's move of scripts to /libexec either?
--
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy
E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
pgpEzF8o08KRQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
