On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 17:13:26 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 11:03:25 -0400 > Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Patrick Lauer <patr...@gentoo.org> > > wrote: > > > can we *please* use the openrc useflag to have correct paths and > > > binary names again? > > > Just because upstream says we should be fedora doesn't mean we > > > have to do it. > > > > I think that having binaries going in different places based on a > > USE flag is going to lead to a big mess - especially if we're > > talking about system packages. > > > > If we want to argue about where we put something by all means hash > > it out or escalate to council. If we want to debate whether to > > install compatibility symlinks I think that is also more reasonable. > > > > However, I don't want the path to bash or glibc or whatever to > > depend on whether a particular package maintainer believes in > > the /usr move or even moreso whether some USE flag is set. > > Path to bash can't change because it will break most of scripts > in the world. > > Path to libc can't change because it will break all of the executables > in the world. Ah, sorry. Let me clarify: path to ld.so. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
