On 12/24/2013 06:48 PM, Jeremy Audet wrote: > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pkgbuild#license> mesa-git and other > -git packages built from same source >> *should* replace packages from [extra] as they provide *everything* >> packages from [extra] do (*exactly* the same files/directories/etc) > > The licenses installed in `/usr/share/licenses/*` are never referenced by > applications. They are not application data, and an appication should never > reference those files. Those licenses are used only by the packaging > system. To state the same point a little differently, the files in > `/lib/mesa/*` belong to the mesa _application_, but the files in > /usr/share/licenses/mesa belong to the mesa _package_. (assuming > /lib/mesa/* exists -- I don't know about the app) As a result, a -git > package *should* differ from a non-git package regarding license files. > > I'm not completely off my rocker here. See, for example, the clyde-git > package. [1] It is the second most popular package in the AUR, by votes, > and it installs license files in /usr/share/licenses/clyde-git. Also, the > arch wiki clearly repeats my point: "license file(s) should be included in: > /usr/share/licenses/pkgname/." [2] > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/cl/clyde-git/PKGBUILD > [2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pkgbuild#license >
Oh, for hells sake. As I said, /usr/share/licenses/mesa-git exists, and license is installed there and I am trying to create /usr/share/licenses/mesa as a symlink to the mentioned directory because lib32-mesa* packages share the same files with non lib32-* packages. D'oh. That still doesn't answer my original question and that wasn't the question about packaging standards nor creating directories. -- Note: My last name is not Krejzi.
