| 1 |
On Thursday 10 August 2006 15:42, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:26:10 -0500 |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Mike Doty <kingtaco@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 6 |
> > Hash: SHA1 |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 9 |
> > > Olivier Crete wrote: |
| 10 |
> > > It makes sense that you wouldn't want these binary packages going |
| 11 |
> > > into /lib32 or /usr/lib32, but /emul seems like an odd choice |
| 12 |
> > > compared to something like /opt/lib32. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I though exactly this when I saw SpanKY's query. Having a directory in |
| 15 |
> '/' is not pretty. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
it doesnt matter whether it's in /emul or /opt or /fooie, if it isnt in the |
| 18 |
system lib32 paths, it's going to be a pita |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
using the system lib32 paths allows the compiler/linker/loader to |
| 21 |
automatically locate the libraries |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> More generally we have varying approaches to pre-built packages; |
| 24 |
> app-office/openoffice-bin installs to /usr for example, while |
| 25 |
> mail-client/mozilla-thunderbird-bin and www-client/mozilla-firefox-bin |
| 26 |
> install to /opt. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
which is broken ... OOo-bin should be in /opt ... |
| 29 |
-mike |
Archives