> I know we have /usr/sfw/libexec but that only has the above mentioned > rmt and some gcc stuff. > > I can't approve this case without the rules for /usr/libexec being > defined. Personally I do not think we should have /usr/libexec in > Solaris we already have a huge amount of non .so content in /usr/lib > including what on GNU systems goes in /usr/libexec. > > I think that this rmt could live in either /usr/gnu/libexec/rmt > /usr/lib/grmt or similar, but not /usr/libexec - unless the rules are > defined and we expect more than just this to live there.
Given that the traditional use of /usr/lib includes more content than just libraries and that the need for familiarity it much more important for commands instead of support programs such as "rmt", I'm fine with not introducing /usr/libexec. I'll work with the submitter and case sponsor to upgrade the case accordingly. dsc
