* Rainer Orth <ro at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> [2006-05-05 10:43]: > Stephen Hahn <sch at eng.sun.com> writes: > > > specific section invocation has been dropped, and the pages returned > > to /usr/gnu/share/man. > > > /usr/share/man/man1gnu > > Manual page section Stable > > In that case, this is either left from the previous version, or needs some > explanation what will go there. It's a leftover. Will correct.
> I'm otherwise happy with this proposal, but would like to raise one final > issue (which btw. came up also during a discussion on sfwnv-discuss): > > http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=8620&tstart=0 I went and looked at the SFW implementation of binutils. We are already doing a custom install, so the cost of mixing the binary locations is not "uneconomical" (quoting myself). Accordingly, we are still debating the purity of a PATH with /usr/bin alone; serendipitous discovery suggests that we should put unconflicting commands there. I believe this is our major remaining issue. > How do we handle GNU libraries? In the specific case of a shared > libreadline, it would probably go into /usr/lib since it doesn't conflict > with existing stuff in /usr. Since there seem to be licensing issues here, > though, I think it would be useful for this case to provide guidelines on > how to handle this case. (I had a draft case on programmatic licensing once upon a time, but shelved it. Perhaps it's time to dust it off.) I agree that a non-conflicting library would go in /usr/lib. I don't think we can separate out /usr/libexec, since JDS and others have established precedent (but we will keep /usr/gnu/libexec). - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/
