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

Re: possible mass-filing of bugs: many shared library packages contain binaries in usr/bin

On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 12:07:47AM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> 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.

With the same reasoning you can also dlopen() a program if you compile
and link it for that, but that's not the usual case. Libraries also
have PIC normally and programs don't. I think there is a big enough
difference between a library and a normal binary.

> > I think it's better to not have binaries in /usr/lib.
> Why? Do you want to move scripts into /etcexec as well?

No, in /libexec. That's the place where the Hurd scripts are. 

Jeroen Dekkers
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: jeroen@openprojects

Attachment: pgpv4qmI2p2gZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: