On Friday 17 February 2006 1:48 pm, Blaisorblade wrote: > On Friday 17 February 2006 16:44, Jeff Dike wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 03:05:28PM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote: > > > For the future packaging: I do believe that Debian's defaults have been > > > actually planned while uml_utilities haven't, so I like the idea of > > > switching to Debian paths as defaults, and possibly using the current > > > ones as fallbacks. > > > > Yup, as long as they are not too Debian-specific. > > They tend to make more sense and adhere better to the > FHS. /var/run/uml-utilities requires support from the distro, but having > uml_net in /usr/lib is a correct idea, for instance.
I'm confused, why would you have executables in a shared library directory instead of /usr/bin or some such? (These are runnable elf binaries, not shared libraries, correct?) Rob -- Never bet against the cheap plastic solution. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-user mailing list User-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-user
