Re: base-files does not create /usr/local directories
> Why don't create them in base-files postinst?
Because dpkg itself was supposed to be smart enough to know what to
do, and rather than replicate the logic in a dozen or so postinst's,
it would be in once place that could be changed to support the policy.
If the decision to put the mkdir's in postinst goes into the policy
manual (I'm certainly not going to change emacs unless the policy
manual changes! :-) then I'd suggest that instead there be an
"install-usrlocal-maybe" script that takes a directory name and
installs it *based on the site policy*. That could be implemented now
by saying "if it's read-only don't fail" but that is *not* likely to
be the right answer for everyone who wants us not to touch
/usr/local. (The FSSTND rules don't say "don't touch /usr/local if
it's readonly", do they? Don't they say "don't touch /usr/local at all"?)
Reply to: