On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 05:04:03PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote: Hi Rob, > 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?) Citing from Debian policy (FHS):
"/usr/lib includes object files, libraries, and internal binaries that are not intended to be executed directly by users or shell scripts." and "Some executable commands such as makewhatis and sendmail have also been traditionally placed in /usr/lib. makewhatis is an internal binary and should be placed in a binary directory; users access only catman. Newer sendmail binaries are now placed by default in /usr/sbin; a symbolic link should remain from /usr/lib. Additionally, systems using a sendmail-compatible mail transport agent should provide /usr/sbin/sendmail as a symbolic link to the appropriate executable." So it would be nice if you can provide a symbolic link from the binary executable to the library file. Cheers SteX -- Stefano Melchior, GPG key = D52DF829 - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://etinarcadiaego.dyndns.org -- http://www.stex.name
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
