On 05/24/2012 08:18 PM, Till Maas wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 09:13:51AM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
On 5/24/12 7:50 AM, Till Maas wrote:
But then the location if a command will depend on whether the system is
a 64 or 32 bit system, which makes it more error prone to write software that
uses such commands on both kind of systems.
libexecdir is already a macro expanded at build time. If you were
hardcoding /usr/libexec you were already broken on non-Red-Hat-like
Linuxes. Don't let already being broken be an excuse for continuing
to be broken.
Using /usr/libexec in a noarch Fedora package did always work. But if
binaries are in %{_libdir}, a noarch package cannot always contain the
correct path, because the noarch package is the same for both 32 and 64
bit systems. I did not know that debian or other distros do not use
/usr/libexec, but I believe that debian uses /usr/lib for both 32 and 64
bit systems, so using /usr/lib/<name>/ will work on both archs.
Yup. Sure we could flip %_libexecdir to point to /usr/lib (NOT
%{_libdir}) instead of /usr/libexec and rebuild (all) packages, most of
them probably wouldn't notice a thing. But then I also dont really see
the point of turning /usr/lib into even bigger mess than it already is.
- Panu -
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
