On 10/20/07, Chad Woolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm no expert, but based on the few times I've read the FHS (this > isn't the first) I don't understand why they just can't go with > /usr/local/lib/ structure as it already exists. I'm sure they have > good reasons, but that document doesn't go far enough to explain it. > They should state the exact phrases of the FHS that they think are > violated by the status quo, and why their decisions make it better. > > Also, just pointing to the document isn't enough. They should also > explain, in detail, potential problems that would be caused by > "violating" the FHS. If the only real problem would be that "it > violates the FHS", then I'm not sure that's a good justification to > change the status quo...
Again, I'm just trying to understand the debian policy on gems myself, but I suspect that the problem comes from this section of the Debian Policy Manual: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s9.1.2 "9.1.2 Site-specific programs As mandated by the FHS, packages must not place any files in /usr/local, either by putting them in the file system archive to be unpacked by dpkg or by manipulating them in their maintainer scripts. " As I understand it, Debian policy requires package installation to keep its hands off the /usr/local tree. Stuff put in /usr/local by the system administrator is supposed to be safe from being changed by package installations/updates etc. I thnk that this makes sense, however what's being described is the package which installs rubygems. The maintainer seems to be interpreting this as forbidding gem when executed from placing things under /usr/local, but I think that this is being too strict. In fact just below the quoted passage the Debian Policy manual says: "However, the package may create empty directories below /usr/local so that the system administrator knows where to place site-specific files. These are not directories in /usr/local, but are children of directories in /usr/local. These directories (/usr/local/*/dir/) should be removed on package removal if they are empty. Note, that this applies only to directories below /usr/local, not in /usr/local. Packages must not create sub-directories in the directory /usr/local itself, except those listed in FHS, section 4.5. However, you may create directories below them as you wish. You must not remove any of the directories listed in 4.5, even if you created them. " So, the debian gem package could be configured to put the gems under /usr/local/lib/ruby... and to create empty directories as needed when installed. But I'm not a debian maintainer so I don't know if there are other restrictions. -- Rick DeNatale My blog on Ruby http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/ _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
