Re: Packaging library examples (binaries/source)
Thomas Viehmann <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Andreas Rottmann wrote:
>>>However - some of these apps are useful in their own right (such as a
>>>data viewer or conversion tool). Is it ok to place a symlink from
>>>/usr/bin to /usr/share/libfoo-apps/bin so that users can invoke these
>> I'd go for just putting them into /usr/bin (watch out for namespace
>> collisions/pollution, though) and not install the source at all. A
>> user needing the source could always 'apt-get source libfoo-apps'.
> Hmm. The mail was just about a month old yet unanswered, yes?
I tend to lag a bit behind with some messages on -devel :-)
> Just to add another cent:
> While it is common practice to put binaries which are not needed to
> be invoked directly into /usr/lib/libfoo or /usr/lib/package, and it
> can be argued that examples may belong in this category, no answer
> to this question is complete without mentioning that arch-dependent
> files in /usr/share seems to be in conflict of FHS and thus in
> violation of debian policy.
Indeed, stupid me has overlooked that really important issue.
Andreas Rottmann | Rotty@ICQ | 118634484@ICQ | email@example.com
http://www.8ung.at/rotty | GnuPG Key: http://www.8ung.at/rotty/gpg.asc
Fingerprint | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219 F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62
Make free software, not war!