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

Re: libexec in glibc

Roger Leigh <roger@whinlatter.uklinux.net> writes:

> tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
> > Jeff Bailey <jbailey@nisa.net> writes:
> > 
> > > The issues is that by Debian policy, all Debian ports must follow the
> > > FHS.  The same is true of the FreeBSD and NetBSD ports (I only noticed
> > > this because of the patch to support FreeBSD).
> > >
> > > Certainly after */libexec is added into the FHS, we can add it back
> > > in.  We would have to recompile a whole lot of Debian anyway, so doing
> > > glibc on top of that shouldn't be a problem.
> > 
> > We need not change anything now in Hurd systems.  We do not need to
> > worry about matching aspects of policy that we expect to change by the
> > time we actually release.  And, we expect that FHS will have, by that
> > time, a Hurd-specific annex that covers this particular point.
> Why keep it Hurd-specific?  If would be equally useful on Linux too (I
> would very much like to see libexec on GNU/Linux if and when the FHS
> adopts it).

Among other things, politics.  It's better to accomplish what we know
we can accomplish, rather than tilting at windmills.  Someday,
perhaps, but for now, just a small step.

Reply to: