Fair enough thank you. Kaiting. On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:39 PM, Allan McRae <allan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 21/05/10 13:29, Kaiting Chen wrote: > >> Hi I was wondering why the policy was to not use /usr/libexec and move >> what >> should go there to /usr/lib/<pkgname>. While it isn't serious it seems to >> me >> that this deviation from the default behavior is unnecessary. One scenario >> I >> can think of where this might cause a problem is if a very security >> conscious administrator wanted to mount /usr/lib as noexec. >> >> > The libexec directory is not specified in the FHS. See > http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ . > > Importantly, /usr/lib/ is not excluded from having binaries. > "/usr/lib includes object files, libraries, and internal binaries that are > not intended to be executed directly by users or shell scripts." > > Allan > -- Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/
