Re: /usr/share

[Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu>]

Brian White <bcwhite@verisim.com> writes:

> Thus, I propose we make /usr/share be treated the same way as
> /usr/local and not allow packages to put anything under it but
> directories.  In most cases, it should be easy to make the program
> search /usr/local, then /usr/share, then /usr/lib, so we can still
> keep the same basic functionality.

Hmm.  I think this is going to be unlikely.  We're planning to switch
to FHS eventually, and it's my impression, that the FHS mandates the
use of /usr/share for much of the stuff we have in /usr/lib.

> I think this would be a good policy for Debian 2.1.  I can see no
> advantages to using /usr/share in packages except for having shared
> configuration and this can easily (is most cases) be fixed by
> searching /usr/share in between searching /usr/local and /usr/lib.

But that's just the point.  Let's say I install the emacs20 package on
my server.  Should it not put stuff in /usr/share?  Then where will
all the other machines find the files?

I think what you really want (and it's been discussed before, though I
don't know if anyone is working on it) is a smarter installation tool
that can have local config info in something like /etc/dpkg.conf
similar to:

  no_touch_dirs: /usr/share /usr/doc
  compress_manpages: yes

etc...

-- 
Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu>
PGP fingerprint = E8 0E 0D 04 F5 21 A0 94  53 2B 97 F5 D6 4E 39 30