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

Re: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au> writes:

> On Tuesday 10 May 2005 02:18, Goswin von Brederlow 
> <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> wrote:
>> Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au> writes:
>> > It seems to me that /usr/libexec is a better name for such things, and
>> > having the same directory names used across distributions provides real
>> > benefits (copying config files and binaries from other distributions when
>> > a bug stops a server working and it's REALLY important to get it fixed
>> > fast).
>> >
>> > Should we change some of these to /usr/libexec?
>> That would be /usr/libexec/arch-os/postfix vs /usr/lib/arch-os/postfix
>> then.
>> If you consider any change then please include the multiarch changes
>> at the same time. No point doing 2 transitions for etch.
> Why would it be desirable to have arch-os directories under libexec?

32bit mozilla with flash plugin and 64bit mozilla without. A lot of
people seem to want that.


Reply to: