On Wednesday 11 April 2012 12:10:05 Steven J Long wrote:
William Hubbs wrote:
Another issue to consider is binaries that want to access things in
/usr/share/*. If a binary in /{bin,sbin} needs to access something in
/usr/share/*, you have two choices. move the binary to /usr or move the
Rich Freeman wrote:
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Steven J Long
sl...@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk wrote:
As for the burden of ensuring that binaries installed to /{s,}bin don't
link to libs in /usr, why not just automate a QA check for that, and let
developers decide whether a fix is
Zac Medico wrote:
On 04/10/2012 07:28 PM, Steven J Long wrote:
I suppose you could script that, but again, it just seems like a lot of
bother to implement an alternative that doesn't actually gain anything
over the traditional setup (plus making sure that partitions are mounted
before udev
William Hubbs wrote:
Another issue to consider is binaries that want to access things in
/usr/share/*. If a binary in /{bin,sbin} needs to access something in
/usr/share/*, you have two choices. move the binary to /usr or move the
thing it wants to access to / somewhere which would involve
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Steven J Long
sl...@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk wrote:
That might be true for some Linux-only packages, but I really find it hard
to believe that any upstream targetting more than one OS (just adding a BSD
is enough) with software that could be considered critical (I
On 04/11/2012 07:13 AM, Steven J Long wrote:
Zac Medico wrote:
On 04/10/2012 07:28 PM, Steven J Long wrote:
I suppose you could script that, but again, it just seems like a lot of
bother to implement an alternative that doesn't actually gain anything
over the traditional setup (plus making
