Re: standard for executable files under /usr/share
On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 10:54:20AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Sven Luther <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > I suppose nobody ever shares a disk between different architectures
> > nowaday anyway, but if it was done, you could put a lot of executables
> > that are not shell script (thing java-like bytecode executables, like
> > the ocaml apps i package) in it, and not have a copy of it for every
> > arch.
> > But then, like said, i don't think people share a disk between different
> > arches, and diskspace is cheap anyway.
> Also, I think that typical `sharable' executables tend to on the small
> side. I guess the point is that the extra cost (work/thought/etc)
> caused by sharing is greater than savings gained.
Because upto now, they were only shell scripts or little perl programs
or something such. When we get to shareables binaries which run in
virtual machines, things may change though.
For example, in the packages i maintain, the following programs :
-rwxr-xr-x 1 luther luther 109696 2002-12-24 14:53 spamoracle
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 90971 2002-12-15 00:46 ledit
Are arch-independent bytecode program that use the ocamlrun virtual
machine to run, they are rather small, there may be larger ones in the
future. That is without counting java programs i now nothing about.
(the ledit program is in the ledit package, marked arch: all,
spamoracle.byte is in the spamoracle-byte package. On the 6 arches
supporting ocaml native code, there is also an arch dependant spamoracle