severity 510484 normal thanks Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > severity 510484 serious > thanks > > Not CCing the submitter or letting the BTS mail the submitter when you reply > to a bug is *not* the right way to go. > >> The files are tiny, relatively, I don't see that this is >> release-critical. There are a lot of packages that would fall over this >> issue. > > The policy, especially the FHS, does *NOT* talk about the size of files. As > other packages start to provide additional scripts for pm-utils, this bug > should be fixed as soon as possible. > > If other packages do it wrong, you should file RC bugs against them. A policy > was not written to make exceptions form it whenever you like to. >
This is copied from the FHS regarding /usr/share: It is recommended that application-specific, architecture-independent directories be placed here. Such directories include groff, perl, ghostscript, texmf, and kbd (Linux) or syscons (BSD). They may, however, be placed in /usr/lib for backwards compatibility, at the distributor's discretion. Similarly, a /usr/lib/games hierarchy may be used in addition to the /usr/share/games hierarchy if the distributor wishes to place some game data there. nowhere in the FHS it is said, that the shell scripts *have* to be placed in /usr/share. The Debian policy in 9.1 doesn't substantiate any special rules regarding /usr/lib and /usr/share, thus I don't see the severity of serious justified so downgrading back to normal. I don't consider the pm-utils shell scripts to be configuration files, users should not need to edit them. There is a separate mechanism though for users to extend/overwrite scrips via /etc/pm/ though. Cheers, Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
