[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#6386: Bug in deb-check

srivasta@datasync.com (Manoj Srivastava)  wrote on 02.01.97 in <87ybeckpkv.fsf@tiamat.datasync.com>:

> >>"Chris" == Chris Fearnley <cjf@netaxs.com> writes:
> Chris> 'Manoj Srivastava wrote:'
> deb-check> bug: usr/sbin/kernel-packageconfig without manpage
> Manoj>  Ok, though this is an internal binary. I wrote a man page that
> Manoj> says that.
> Chris> Then it should be in /usr/lib, right?
> 	Umm, I see no such directive n the policy or the programers
>  guide, or the fsstnd.  Also, there are a number of *config{ure}
>  programs in /usr/sbin, I was just following what I took to be
>  standard practice. I know that gcc binaries live in /usr/lib, so
>  standard practice may be debatable; but the point is that nothing
>  tells me that /usr/sbin is the wrong location for internal binaries.

Well, my impression was that the various *configure programs _aren't_  
"internal binaries". Admins are expected to want to call them explicitely,  
to configure some packages.

If kernel-packageconfig is the same, a real man page seems sensible.  
Otherwise, it's clearly something very different.

As to internal binaries in /usr/sbin vs. /usr/lib, there seems to be no  
clear answer, mostly because it is often hard to decide if a binary really  
is internal. The boundarys are quite fuzzy; lots of mainly-internal-use  
programs have some mode of interactive invocation: sometimes only for  
debugging, sometimes for exotic features, sometimes because one executable  
does several different functions (like smail). Just where do we draw the  

MfG Kai

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com

Reply to: