Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 12:14:19AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > I'm just not seeing any benefits that are worth bloating /usr.
>
> Wait, are you serious? The bloat of /usr/lib having thousands of
> files doesn't bother you, but the two dozen in /usr is bothersome?
Huh? Using libexec wouldn't reduce the file count of /usr/lib by thousands,
unless I'm grossly misunderstanding it--it'd reduce it by a tiny amount;
and as you said "most packages do not have files in /usr/lib at all", I
don't think I am. (I have 846 files and directories in /usr/lib, and only
100 aren't .a, .la or .so, and I'm not sure how many of that 100 would be
moved to libexec.)
If having so many files in /usr/lib does bother you, then splitting out
libexec doesn't seem like a very effective fix. (Moving soname symlinks
to a subdirectory, on the other hand, would cut it down, on my system,
by almost 40%.)
This just seems like change for the sake of change, with trivial benefits,
if any.
--
Glenn Maynard
Reply to: