On Dec 12, 2012, at 16:57, Hans Aberg <haber...@telia.com> wrote: > On 12 Dec 2012, at 23:50, Eric Pancer wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Hans Aberg <haber...@telia.com> wrote: >>> On 12 Dec 2012, at 21:16, Eric Pancer wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 2:14 PM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>>>> The libexec route appears to cater for all of that. We should use bin >>>>> just for executables supposed to be entry points of LilyPond. >>>> >>>> Please, no! >>>> >>>> From man 1 hier >>>> libexec/ system daemons & system utilities (executed by >>>> other programs) >>> ... >>>> local/ executables, libraries, etc. not included by the >>>> basic operating system >>> >>> There is a Filesystem Hierarchy Standard >>> http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard >> >> Right, like hier(1) describes. FHS looks to be rather Linux-specific. >> Correct me if I'm wrong. > > Linux is a strictly speaking a kernel, like Mac OS X is running the kernel > Mach, often combined with what is called GNU OS. Mac OS X derives originally > from FreeBSD.
Yes I know. > > As for the standard, it is a development of BSD old traditions. So a similar > origin of OSs make them putting stuff in similar places, but with some > differences. > Right. > As for the POSIX/UNIX standards, they have no so such requirements, so in > general, there can be quite some variation. Right. What's the point here? _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
