| 1 |
On 14/08/2012 09:57, Samuli Suominen wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Sorry I was vague in that statement, I meant moving to both /usr/lib/ |
| 4 |
> when suitable (and usually the default from upstream lately) and |
| 5 |
> /usr/lib64/xfce* (Location of .so Xfce plugins) |
| 6 |
> Xfce had compability code for finding plugins from /usr/libexec only for |
| 7 |
> 4.10 series, and is marked as -DXFCE_DEPRECATED code, 4.12 will solely |
| 8 |
> use /usr/lib64/xfce4/ |
| 9 |
> I've done nothing against the status quo, only following sane reasoning |
| 10 |
> and defaults from upstreams who have made a strong case for it being so, |
| 11 |
> or when they have actually made it impossible without carrying custom |
| 12 |
> patches forever |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
For plugins (if they are plugins) we really need to use the $libdir as |
| 15 |
they are ABI-dependent, so I'm perfectly happy with moving them out of |
| 16 |
libexec (shouldn't have been there in the first place). |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I'd still would like a revisit by council for what concerns /usr/libexec |
| 19 |
though. I'm afraid that last time I let it slide after Kugelfang |
| 20 |
promised he would write a draft that never came, as we had issue with cups. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
In general, I'm in favour of using lib (and not $libdir) if they are |
| 23 |
_executables_, which means they are not loaded in the same address space |
| 24 |
of any other program. I'm just concerned of having another hundred |
| 25 |
directories in /usr/lib as that could slow down ld.so... |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes |
| 29 |
flameeyes@×××××××××.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ |
Archives