On 10-May-2005, Sven Mueller wrote: > Note that (application specific portions of) /usr/share are often > mounted even across different types of Unix (derivates). I know of at > least 4 sites where /usr/share/cups was network-mounted by both Linux > and Solaris clients. > > That's the reason why I usually think of /usr/share as architecture > indepedent and non-executable data. The good thing about the (standard?) shebang convention -- using a first line of '#!/path/to/shell' in the executable file -- is that you can have executable scripts shared even between different Unices and architectures. If the named shell exists, it should be able to execute the script. (If not, that's a bug in the shell or the script.) That's the only way I know that executable things can be trusted to work across different Unices and architectures, so it's understandable where your "non-executable" assumption could arise. -- \ "The right to use [strong cryptography] is the right to speak | `\ Navajo." -- Eben Moglen | _o__) | Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature