On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 06:09:10AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 12/21/2012 05:54 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > >On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 05:38:17AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > >>I disagree. systemd simply hasn't taken libexecdir into account in > >>its design and now is trying to propagate their oversight/mistake as > >>"standard" instead of making their works compliant with _our_ > >>distro's demands. > > > >libexec doesn't exist in any published version of the FHS, > > FHS != GCS > > http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#Directory-Variables > > IIRC, it's around there for at approx 20 years. So? > >and even the > >draft of 3.0 makes it clear that it's optional. > We all know about the strong positions of the FHS. It is the least > common denominator of all distros and deliberately weakly formulated > ;) > > >Our use of libexec is > >non-standard, > > C.f above. I disagree. The GCS describe the behaviour of code written to the GCS, nothing more. The majority of the software we ship doesn't conform to them. > >not systemd's use of lib. > > I disagree again. systemd is in its infancy and needs to do its > homework. As I see it, like many other works, they simply did not > take the GCS and the side-effects of multi-arching into account. They're not a GNU project, and so there's no reason for them to follow the GCS. There's also no reason for it to support multiarch - you're never going to have two copies of systemd installed simultaneously. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
