On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 12:14:19AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > I'm just not seeing any benefits that are worth bloating /usr. > > Wait, are you serious? The bloat of /usr/lib having thousands of > files doesn't bother you, but the two dozen in /usr is bothersome?
Huh? Using libexec wouldn't reduce the file count of /usr/lib by thousands, unless I'm grossly misunderstanding it--it'd reduce it by a tiny amount; and as you said "most packages do not have files in /usr/lib at all", I don't think I am. (I have 846 files and directories in /usr/lib, and only 100 aren't .a, .la or .so, and I'm not sure how many of that 100 would be moved to libexec.) If having so many files in /usr/lib does bother you, then splitting out libexec doesn't seem like a very effective fix. (Moving soname symlinks to a subdirectory, on the other hand, would cut it down, on my system, by almost 40%.) This just seems like change for the sake of change, with trivial benefits, if any. -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]