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

Matthew Garrett mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org
Fri Dec 21 07:45:45 UTC 2012


On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:24:09PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:

> 2) the systemd exceptions allows placing files in %{_prefix}/lib rather
> than %{_libdir} (the exceptions allow both putting the helper apps in there
> which would generally be okay with just a multilib exception and the unit
> files which are arch specific data and therefore usually go in %{_libdir}
> and therefore needed a special exception).  The only reason people can drag
> %{_libexecdir} in to this discussion is that helper binaries are allowed in
> either %{_libdir} or %{_libexecdir}.  In the context of forcing people to
> use a specific directory not specified by standards its meaningless because
> %{_libdir} is a suitable alternative.

I think the libexec discussion is fairly relevant. Right now a package 
can drop binaries in libexecdir and have a consistent path regardless of 
the architecture, which is valuable. However, doing so results in 
inconsistencies with other distributions which don't provide libexecdir. 
This is clearly suboptimal, and it's reasonable to ask that the 
packaging guidelines recognise that and handle it without requiring 
additional exceptions - if a package wouldn't require an exception to 
install binaries in libexec, it shouldn't need an exception install 
binaries in lib.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org


More information about the devel mailing list