On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 16:34 -0400, Ed Hill wrote: > On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 11:59:09 -0700 Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > > There's two possible ways to work around this: > > %{_libexecdir} > > /usr/libexec/gromacs-2/bin/wheel > > > > /usr/lib (*not* %{_libdir}): > > /usr/lib/gromacs-2/bin/wheel > > > > I don't know that I favor one of these over the other... they both > > have precedent. You could look at this as end-user applications or as > > environment-modules making these binaries "private" to the > > environment-modules "program". > > Yes, absolutely! I can think of examples where both /usr/lib > and /usr/libexec have been used for "private" executables. Yes, there are. Wrt. the GNU-Standards, packages with "private" executables in in /usr/lib qualify as packaging bugs. In Fedora reality however, most packages shipping "private" executables in /usr/lib inherited this either from their RH packaging history or from their packagers/upstream's ignorance/unawareness on the GNU-Standards. > I don't > have a strong preference for either -- I just want one to be chosen as > the "standard Fedora way" to handle the various use cases I described > earlier. Internal applications => libexec User-callable applications => bindir User-callable add-on applications => /usr/lib/<somewhere> (!) or % libdir/<somewhere> Multi-arched applications => %libdir/<somewhere> Ralf -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging