On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 03/09/11 18:05, Jan Steffens wrote:
>>
>> I've been wondering why we do not have /usr/libexec.
>>
> I think the general reason is that the libexec directory is not specified in
> the FHS. Have not looked at the latest draft though...
If I
On 03/09/11 18:05, Jan Steffens wrote:
I've been wondering why we do not have /usr/libexec.
The GNOME packages apparently use --libexecdir=/usr/lib/$pkgname.
We've been running into problems with GNOME 3.2 because increasingly
more components depend on the libexecdir being the same across all
pa
On 03.09.2011 10:05, Jan Steffens wrote:
> I've been wondering why we do not have /usr/libexec.
I think we don't have /usr/libexec because it's not in FHS [1].
> The GNOME packages apparently use --libexecdir=/usr/lib/$pkgname.
> We've been running into problems with GNOME 3.2 because increasingl
I've been wondering why we do not have /usr/libexec.
The GNOME packages apparently use --libexecdir=/usr/lib/$pkgname.
We've been running into problems with GNOME 3.2 because increasingly
more components depend on the libexecdir being the same across all
packages (we already had this problem in GD
4 matches
Mail list logo