Re: mass bug gnustep programs: policy violation
On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 04:14:36AM -0400, Dan Weber wrote:
> Jérôme Warnier wrote:
> >Le mar 22/06/2004 à 05:35, Dan Weber a écrit :
> >
> >>There is a serious policy violation regarding all programs dependant
> >>upon gnustep-base1 and themselves. They break Section 9.1.1 of the
> >>Debian Policy.
> >>
> >>Using /usr/lib/GNUstep for non-lib and executable binaries for direct
> >>invocation is not permitted.
> >
> >Mozilla and OpenOffice.org also violate the FHS in a similar way. The
> >packagers say that for such huge applications, having files all around
> >the system is more a problem than violating FHS.
> >
> >[..]
> >
>
> Why should we let this go by? The Debian Policy sets rules for all
> packages not just some, thus similar bugs should be filed against
> mozilla and openoffice.org.
>
For instance because many huge programs are built by defining an
APPLICATION_DIR and creating a complicated tree of other dirs there,
with a large mess of libs, bins and data all mixed together.
This is a very traditional approach in the *nix world. Moving from
that approach could require heavy patching. You know, not all
programs are written with the needed flexibility and some
of them are multi-platform (e.g.mozilla, ooffice) and
need to find bad arch compromises for non-nix worlds. That's for
general theory...
In the specific case you point, files could be probably moved in
the right places and a sym link could be created in /usr/lib/<app>
to avoid breaking the application. That will be used 'internally'
and so will be ok by the FHS pov.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
Reply to: