Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pedro Kröger) writes: > >>> This is very bad mojo and a violation of the GNU coding standards, >>> which require that /usr/share is only for architecture independent >>> files. >> >> really? I thought that /usr/local/share was for architecture independent >> files: >> >> "The root of the directory tree for read-only architecture-independent >> data files. This should normally be /usr/local/share" [1] > > Isn't that what I just said?
I see the distinction you were making. No, /usr/share and /usr/local/share have the same semantics. Of course, lilypond installs by default into /usr/local/share; I said /usr/share only because I configure with --prefix=/usr and forgot that this isn't standard. The bug is there regardless of the value of --prefix; $(datadir) is only for architecture independent files. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
