On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 20:42, Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Le Lun 20 février 2012 18:50, Kay Sievers a écrit : >> On Feb 20, 2012 6:25 PM, "Toshio Kuratomi" <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Udev rules and systemd units belong to the installed daemon. This daemon >> can only exist exactly one single time, and never be installed by multilib >> packages, hence they do not ever belong into libdir. > > Actually, Udev rules and systemd units belong to the package that installed > them. That's why hiding them in a private lib dir is wrong > > When amavisd instaciates clamav using the generic unit shipped with clamav but > using an amavisd-specific conf file the clamav systemd unid is shared with > amavisd > > That's why share is the natural place to share this arch-independant > configuration and putting it in /usr/lib is grandfathering an exception that > only existed because /share didn't exist I couldn't disagree more. /usr/share in our general understanding not to be used for package-private things. There is no reason to have /usr/share/<pkgdir>/ and /usr/lib/<pkgdir>, even LSB specifies that only a _single_ dir should be used, hence the one in lib not in share. Even the original distinction between arch-dependent and arch-independent to support a share/ subdir that can be *shared* between different machines will break with config like udev and systemd in share/. This is not a *natural* place at all. We tend to interpret /usr/share as something today, to place stuff into that is really *shared* on the same host, like icons, man pages, things that are mere a collection of similar stuff that multiple packages use. It's definitely not a place to store system instructions and system plugins. Kay -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
