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

Policy and FHS-2.3? (was: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec)

* Peter Samuelson <peter@p12n.org> [050509 03:07]:

> Well, the reason */libexec exists is to avoid overloading the meaning
> of */lib to include things other than libraries.  Just as /sbin was
> invented (way back in the day) to stop overloading /etc with things
> other than config files.

I think one of the problems is, that the current Debian
Policy still mandates FHS version 2.1 which has already 
been superseeded by version 2.2 in May, 2001, which has
- in turn - been superseeded by FHS version 2.3 released on
January, 2004[2,3]. Among some other things, FHS version 2.3
provides a /srv hierarchy to pick up at least some of the
non-library contents that is currently living below 
/usr/lib (e.g. CGI-Scripts)[4]. 

Personally, I'm in favor of ultimately adopting FHS version 2.3, 
rather than inventing new paths (such as /usr/libexec) which does 
not comply with any of the FHS versions so far.

This issue has also been discussed at debian-lsb some time
ago, but is is not quite clear to me if this has finally 
led to a decision by consensus[5]. 
Are there any plans/work in progress in view of FHS version 
2.3 and its inclusion in the policy? 

> I agree, though, that unless the FHS decides to adopt libexec, there's
> little point in Debian doing so.

ACK. :-)

Best regards - Juergen

[1] http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s9.1
[2] http://www.pathname.com/fhs/announce-2.2.html
[3] http://www.pathname.com/fhs/announce-2.3.html
[4] http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SRVDATAFORSERVICESPROVIDEDBYSYSTEM
[5] http://lists.debian.org/debian-lsb/2003/11/msg00009.html

GPG A997BA7A | 87FC DA31 5F00 C885 0DC3  E28F BD0D 4B33 A997 BA7A

Attachment: pgp8XKd5TdQX1.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: