On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 07:57:49AM +0300, Basin Ilya wrote: > I agree. Consider RHEL/CentOS where you can simultanneously install both .i686 and .x86_64 versions of one package. The packages are allowed to have overlapping files, if these files don't differ. > > If one puts script libraries to $libdir/<subdir>, CentOS will have duplicate files in /lib/<subdir> and /lib64/<subdir>, but in case of $datadir there will be only one /usr/share/<subpackage> If you install architecture-dependent shell function library files into $datadir and then mount that hierarchy on different architectures, this will fail. Different architectures in this case means OpenBSD, NetBSD, Solaris and Ubuntu, and the architecture dependance comes from the location of certain utilities used by the shell library (GNU "grep" is /usr/local/bin/ggrep on OpenBSD, /usr/pkg/bin/ggrep on NetBSD, /usr/bin/ggrep on Solaris, while it's /bin/grep on Ubuntu). Andreas > > > On 02.03.2017 06:52, Russ Allbery wrote: > > Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > >> $libdir/<subdir>/ (e.g. %libdir/<package>) is the playground a package can > >> install more or less whatever it wants, comprising executables. > >> As your "scripts" don't seem to be "programs", $libdir/<subdir> probably > >> is what you are looking for. > > $datadir/<subdir>, no? Script libraries are almost certainly > > architecture-independent. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Autoconf mailing list > Autoconf@xxxxxxx > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
