2011/2/8 Maciej Bliziński <[email protected]>: > 2011/2/8 Philip Brown <[email protected]>: > >> As far as I can think of, there is no clean simple grammatical >> construct you can use, that covers "move the file, or make a >> symlink". >> Using the word "move" in the spec, denies the use of sylinks. The >> whole point of symlinking, is to NOT move, but make a reference >> instead. > > Please take another look at the revision 2011-02-08 of the document, I > don't think it mandates the use of regular files only. > > http://wiki.opencsw.org/proposal:shared-library-placement
As requested, I took another look. I hate to say it, but perhaps must do so. Please take this in the most neutral manner; perhaps you are missing a nuance of English in this. Using the word "move", disallows symlinks. You have to use a different word. The last paragraphs almost make flexible use of the word "move", but only becuase they dont fully mandate putting anything in /opt/csw/lib at all. In contrast, where you do mandate something, you unambiguously used the word "move" again. " If a library previously thought to be private is in fact needed by other software, it has to be first moved to the shared library location," SO: "has to" == "must" "moved to the shared library location" == "mv blah.so /opt/csw/lib". That wording disallows symlinks. _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
