| 1 |
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 11:03:25 -0400 |
| 2 |
Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> |
| 5 |
> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > can we *please* use the openrc useflag to have correct paths and |
| 7 |
> > binary names again? |
| 8 |
> > Just because upstream says we should be fedora doesn't mean we have |
| 9 |
> > to do it. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I think that having binaries going in different places based on a USE |
| 12 |
> flag is going to lead to a big mess - especially if we're talking |
| 13 |
> about system packages. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> If we want to argue about where we put something by all means hash it |
| 16 |
> out or escalate to council. If we want to debate whether to install |
| 17 |
> compatibility symlinks I think that is also more reasonable. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> However, I don't want the path to bash or glibc or whatever to depend |
| 20 |
> on whether a particular package maintainer believes in the /usr move |
| 21 |
> or even moreso whether some USE flag is set. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Path to bash can't change because it will break most of scripts |
| 24 |
in the world. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Path to libc can't change because it will break all of the executables |
| 27 |
in the world. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Best regards, |
| 31 |
Michał Górny |
Archives