Miloslav Trmac mitr at volny.cz
Tue May 10 16:54:53 UTC 2005

On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 09:49:14AM -0700, Per Bjornsson wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-05-10 at 12:28 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > Michael Schroeder (mls at suse.de) said: 
> > > Why not /usr/share/xscreensaver if they are arch independent?
> > 
> > /usr/share is for files that can run on any architecture. These
> > are files that can be archtecture-specific, but don't have to be.
> Yes, but would it actually hurt (well, apart from the work of changing
> the packaging) to have them live in /usr/lib/xscreensaver instead
> of /usr/libexec/xscreensaver?
Yes, it would (a little).  Assume you write an xscreensaver hack in Python,
naturally resulting in a noarch package.  Now the package will have to
contain both /usr/lib/xscreensaver/pythonhack
and /usr/lib64/xscreensaver/pythonhack.

More information about the devel mailing list