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/$pkgname.
We've been running into problems with GNOME 3.2 because increasingly
more components depend on the libexecdir being the same across all
packages (we already had this problem in GDM, where we currently
The other option, used by a few other packages, seems to be using
--libexecdir=/usr/lib, which seems the next best solution to me. That
is, if /usr/libexec is not available.
I think the general reason is that the libexec directory is not
specified in the FHS. Have not looked at the latest draft though...
Importantly, /usr/lib/ is not excluded from having binaries.
"/usr/lib includes object files, libraries, and internal binaries that
are not intended to be executed directly by users or shell scripts."
As far as --libexecdir=/usr/lib vs /usr/lib/$pkgname, I think that
really depends how much is being shoved in /usr/lib. Could you use