FWIW, NUT driver "rhino" is *old* (in Git since migration from SVN, so pre-2006), so the path name is delivered for a couple of decades at least.
The https://github.com/mozilla/rhino is also well-established, about as old as NUT. So conflating the standard filesystem layout?... A case of "play stupid games, win stupid prizes" I think. It didi however bring up the conflict, which users could have had for a while calling `rhino` as root or unprivileged user and getting wildly different programs (based on who was first in PATH search). I guess I do agree about (a dedicated location under) "libexec" being a more proper name for NUT driver programs, if only to avoid such conflicts. Jim On Sun, May 18, 2025 at 4:09 PM Greg Troxel via Nut-upsuser < [email protected]> wrote: > Greg Troxel via Nut-upsuser <[email protected]> > writes: > > > Eyal Lebedinsky <[email protected]> writes: > > > >>> But seriously, it looks like you are running into a Fedora packaging > >>> issue, not a nut issue. I suggest you report this to Fedora. > >> > >> I raised it on the fedora users list and then created > >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2267022 > >> and it seems to progress from there. > > > > Great! > > Reading that, the issue is not really that bin and sbin were merged. > That is just what exposed the issue. The root cause is that the fedora > nut package puts drivers in one of bin or sbin when it should be in > /usr/libexec or better yet /usr/libexec/nut. > > _______________________________________________ > Nut-upsuser mailing list > [email protected] > https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser >
_______________________________________________ Nut-upsuser mailing list [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser
