On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 12:00:32PM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Ola Lundqvist <opal@debian.org> writes:
> > I do not really see a problem here. All gnustep packages store
> > files in a (at least sort of) FHS compliant directory:
> > /usr/lib/GNUstep
> Are the files stored there only object files, libraries and internal
> binaries not intended to be executed directly by users? [This is quoted
> From the FHS]
> > It is not very different from perl, python, emacs, java (and more) packages
> > that have a "filesystem" of it's own and managed there.
> Listing Perl, Python and Emacs here is totally wrong (and I don't know
> enough about Java packaging to speak about it). Perl is the best
> example: Architecture-dependend data is stored in /usr/lib/perl{/,5/},
> arch-indep data in /usr/share/perl.
Not 100% true; /usr/lib/perl{/,5/} contain architecture-dependent binary
modules, *along with any architecture-independent wrappers that accompany
them*.
And python includes no differentiation whatsoever between /usr/share and
/usr/lib.
> Perl scripts that are intended to be used directly go to {/usr,}/bin.
Right, this is one of the points I have the biggest problem with, wrt
current GNUstep filesystem layout.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature