Re: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec
On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 08:39:10AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Martin Dickopp <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> >> It seems that Red Hat has a lot of programs under /usr/libexec that are
> >> under /usr/lib in Debian. One example is /usr/lib/postfix
> >> vs /usr/libexec/postfix.
> >> It seems to me that /usr/libexec is a better name for such things,
> > I disagree. Why is it important to distinguish between shared libraries
> > and internal binaries (i.e. programs not supposed to be called directly
> > by a user)?
> lib is the place where ld searches for libraries. Linking is not
> speedy, and a non-trivial amount of the time is spent slogging through
> /usr/lib looking for the libraries wanted.
The number of directory entries in /usr/lib should not make any
difference to a modern GNU linker on a modern filesystem, unless
you have thousands or millions of them.