Summary/Minutes for today's FESCo meeting (2012-12-19)

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 23:01 -0500, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2012, Adam Williamson wrote:
> 
> > All this for the rather questionable benefit of having a specifically
> > defined place for helper-scripts-not-meant-to-be-executed-directly,
> > which gains us...what, exactly, over just putting them
> > in /usr/lib/(appname) or /usr/share/(appname) or whatever?
> 
> 
> If you put it in /usr/lib/foo/ on 64bit machines, then I can see phasing
> out libexec, but as an upstream with some scripts but also binary
> helpers, I have consciously avoid the /usr/lib{64} usage and kept things
> in libexec. In fact, I moved some stuff from /usr/lib*/foo/ to libexec
> to get less headaches.
> 
> > I don't see
> > that libexec is actually giving us some kind of huge win to justify the
> > inconveniences.
> 
> Sorry, what is the inconvenience of libexec?

The bit of my mail that you cut out?
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net