Re: FHS ambiguity: /usr/lib or /usr/share?
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 12:18:14PM +0200, Dmitry Borodaenko wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:14:26AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> AS>>> "Ruby sucks". Ignore it. Arch-indep to share, arch-dep to lib,
> AS>>> screw everything else.
> DB>> That didn't convince me, neither in "Ruby sucks" part (all my packages
> DB>> in Debian except Alicq are Ruby libraries :), nor in "arch-indep to
> DB>> share" part: aside from common sense "lib is for libraries", in another
> DB>> sub-thread it was already mentioned that even interpreted libraries are
> DB>> not always "arch-indep".
> SL> But then, there are some that are.
>
> Sure, but it is not mandated in any kind of policy that they should be.
> And it can't be mandated, or such policy would soon become a mess with
> all the per-case clauses. I think "anything that gets executed goes to
> lib" makes things more clear cut.
Well, but the policy could let the choice to the package maintainer,
which should know if his package is arch indep or not.
> SL> Finally, i don't know, but are they all that much people really
> SL> using /usr/share shared between different arches ?
>
> At least that is usage that FHS refers to, and the only practical effect
> of such division aside from abstract consistency.
Yes, but do you (or someone) know of someone really doing this ?
> SL> Does dpkg/apt even allow this to work without breaking all kind of
> SL> things ?
>
> AFAIK yes, but I'm too lazy to prove this :)
Well, but it would be dependant of the package containing exactly the
same stuff on all arches.
I think the package should be split into a arch: all part which goes
into /usr/share and is built only one time, and a arch: any (or whatver)
part which goes into /usr/lib.
But again, is it really worth the trouble to set this up, only for some
hypothetical multi-arch installations needing this ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
>
> --
> Dmitry Borodaenko
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: