Re: possible mass-filing of bugs: many shared library packages contain binaries in usr/bin
Previously Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> If you can't see the difference between a binary and a library it's
> probably unuseful.
The difference is technically really minimal. Look at glibc for
example, which you can run as a normal binary as well.
> I think it's better to not have binaries in /usr/lib.
Why? Do you want to move scripts into /etcexec as well?
/email@example.com This space intentionally left occupied \
| firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org