'Twas brillig, and Thomas Backlund at 27/07/12 15:21 did gyre and gimble: > 27.07.2012 17:16, Anssi Hannula skrev: >> 27.07.2012 17:12, Colin Guthrie kirjoitti: >>> 'Twas brillig, and Thomas Backlund at 27/07/12 15:02 did gyre and gimble: >>>> 27.07.2012 16:55, Anssi Hannula skrev: >>>>> 26.07.2012 20:17, [email protected] kirjoitti: >>>>>> Revision >>>>>> 5228 >>>>>> Author >>>>>> tv >>>>>> Date >>>>>> 2012-07-26 19:17:41 +0200 (Thu, 26 Jul 2012) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Log Message >>>>>> >>>>>> revert some duplicated manbo stuff (all identical to default but >>>>>> %_libexecdir that changed to %_libdir when mga forked mdv) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hmm, I'm not sure I understand. AFAIK we have always (i.e. on Mageia and >>>>> on Mandriva before Mageia) had %_libexecdir as %_libdir. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yep, >>>> see: >>>> http://svn.mandriva.com/viewvc/packages/updates/2010.1/rpm-manbo-setup/current/SOURCES/manbo.macros?view=markup >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> The change means that even 64-bit libexec binaries will be put into >>>>> /usr/lib, is that intentional? >>>> >>>> So this change should be reverted imho... >>> >>> While I don't have a massively strong opinion on this topic, the only >>> reason we have lib vs lib64 is to avoid name conflicts. If we consider >>> libexec binaries as the kind of binary you'd only have installed once >>> (i.e. not something you need for each arch, then the libexec dir is >>> effectively "a private bin dir" and thus can be the same on both 32 and >>> 64 bit IMO. So I guess I'd ultimately prefer /usr/lib/ to always be used >>> regardless of arch (i.e. one less difference between 32 and 64 bit builds). >> >> +1 on one dir regardless of arch, however the question is if that should >> be /usr/lib or /usr/libexec. On fedora it is the latter, and we seem to >> have some stuff (plymouth ans some others) there also. >>
Well some packages override this e.g.: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=systemd.git;a=blob;f=systemd.spec;hb=HEAD#l164 Maybe worth asking Kay about that in #systemd to see if there is an argument against using /usr/libexec more generally? > In that case, I'd say /usr/libexec to keep /usr/lib as arch clean as > possible... Assuming we're not missing something, yes, I agree. > And I guess we will catch any name conflicts when we start full rebuild... > > speaking of that btw... anything missing for that, or should we plan & > start the full rebuild... ? I think all the things I wanted to do before the rebuild are in place so I'm certainly fine with it. Col -- Colin Guthrie colin(at)mageia.org http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited http://www.tribalogic.net/ Open Source: Mageia Contributor http://www.mageia.org/ PulseAudio Hacker http://www.pulseaudio.org/ Trac Hacker http://trac.edgewall.org/
