And maintainers should also have a sane sense of reality.
> > If it is not a requirement, then we could find better things to spend time
> > on, than introducing and maintaining patches to move package-private libs
> > out of /usr/lib, and then dealing with incompatibilities with upstream
> > code or other distros or whatever that such a move may introduce.
The argument of "compatibility with other distros" is void, IMHO. We are
talking about cases where just some code is shared among few binaries
of the same package, not more, not less.
And introducing a sophisticated structure (also remember multi-arch)
only to give someones eyes the aesthetic satisfaction is pure waste of
> Itâ€™s actually a good way to find if some other package uses some library
> intentionally kept private. Sometimes you simply donâ€™t want this to be
"Sometimes". Is this case relevant now? I don't think so. It is not even
possible (unless somebody intends to use kludges) since the headers are
not available to others.
> > After all, what's wrong with package-private libs in /usr/lib?
> Itâ€™s a recipe for failure. Itâ€™s a private interface, not defined to
> remain compatible. If you make it available in a public place, people
> will use it. If people use it, it will fail.
C'mon, you are making a mountain out of a molehill.
"Ein schĂ¤biges Kamel trĂ¤gt immer noch die Lasten vieler Esel."
-- Goethe, Maximen und Reflektionen, Nr. 548