On Tue, 2005-05-10 at 12:28 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Michael Schroeder (mls@xxxxxxx) said: > > Why not /usr/share/xscreensaver if they are arch independent? > > /usr/share is for files that can run on any architecture. These > are files that can be archtecture-specific, but don't have to be. Yes, but would it actually hurt (well, apart from the work of changing the packaging) to have them live in /usr/lib/xscreensaver instead of /usr/libexec/xscreensaver? It seems that the former is what would be prescribed by the FHS. Since this came up in the SELinux context, there appears to be some real value in following the FHS since it would apparently significantly simplify setting up the policy in a distribution-independent fashion. /Per -- Per Bjornsson <perbj@xxxxxxxxxxxx> -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
