Re: Do we want /usr/libexec ?
On Sun, 14 Dec 1997, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> > Some upstream packages place auxiliary executables (i.e., executables
> > which are not called by the user/sysadmin himself) into /usr/libexec or a
> > subdirectory.
>
> I think that executable files are just another form of data. If the user
> might want to call these files by name, as commands, we put them into a
> special directory, included in the PATH variable. If they aren't supposed to
> be called by users, then they don't differ from normal data files, also note
> that libraries are executable code that can't be invoked directly from the
> user. I think /usr/lib/ is fine.
Totally agreed.
(Don't we have any other opinions? It would be the first time...)
If noone objects, I'd prepare a policy change to forbid the use of
/usr/libexec.
Thanks,
Chris
-- Christian Schwarz
schwarz@monet.m.isar.de, schwarz@schwarz-online.com
schwarz@debian.org, schwarz@mathematik.tu-muenchen.de
PGP-fp: 8F 61 EB 6D CF 23 CA D7 34 05 14 5C C8 DC 22 BA
CS Software goes online! Visit our new home page at
http://www.schwarz-online.com
Reply to: