Re: Bug#2182: perl shouldn't touch /usr/local
On Fri, 19 Jan 1996, Michael E. Deisher wrote:
> An example of this is fvwm / X (I don't remember exactly which package
> was to blame). Recently, the package changed maintainers and all the
> fvwmrc's on my system broke because they relied on having
> /usr/local/bin in the default path. The most recent maintainer hadn't
> bothered to add /usr/local/bin since it was not in the upstream
> package sources / config files.
I think this case is slightly out of the ordinary, in that when I took
over X there were no Debianised sources - the Debian packages had been
constructed from the binaries distributed by the XFree86 people. In
building the new packages I tried to make as few modifications to both
the configuration scripts provided by the XFree86 people and by the
previous version of the Debian X packages while correcting the more
obvious errors and omissions. /usr/local/bin was an oversight, which I
corrected as soon as it was pointed out to me.
> Do we have an official policy on this? Of course, one person's
> "bug-fix" may be another person's "additiion".
Quite. I believe that Debian packages should be as close to the packages
distributed by the upstream maintainers as possible, while fitting in
with the filesystem standard and the rest of Debian.