Re: /usr/local in some packages
On Tue, 29 Sep 1998, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 1998 at 01:28:27PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Sep 1998, Herbert Xu wrote:
> >
> > > After purging emacs today, the damn thing deleted my /usr/local symlink since
> > > it was the last package to have /usr/local in it. Obviously this is not very
> > > clever.
> >
> > Would have this happened if base-files contained /usr/local as an empty
> > directory?
>
> Well, maybe. But then people may start using /usr/local/lib and you will end
> up adding that to base-files and maybe even more.
Well, no, the thing would stop at /usr/local. You should not be forced to
have anything inside /usr/local.
But yes, I agree it is not needed at all. Just fix emacs20, it's already
reported as Bug #23431.
--
"26c03c8e40511060460d97e1faa16a07" (a truly random sig)
Reply to: