Marcus Meissner wrote:
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:14:23PM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
todd rme wrote:
This is still basically an aesthetic argument. Is there any functional reason to change this? Is there anything that is currently not working that would work better under this scenario? How many packages currently need workaround to install properly that would not need such workarounds under your scenario?
-Todd
---- There are about 1300+ packages in my /usr/lib64 dir. The default on packages coming with config would have been /usr/lib.
That's 1300 packages that had a have a special patch applied (75% of total).
Seems like not having to go out of one's way to patch away from what is the 'normal expected path', would be more than aesthetics....
FWIW, with opensuse, the 'fhs' package is an optional install.
There is no requirement that openSuSE without fhs installed be FHS compatible, is there?
Or is openSUSE FHS compatible without the FHS package installed?
Actually no, as %configure RPM macro does that for you automatically.
Does what? Install FHS? I'm not clear as to the referent of 'that'.
And there is of course reasoning behind that, and it is defined for us.
Ciao, Marcus
---- Guess it depends on what you mean by patch. Since I build from pre-rpm sources on releases that are not in the SuSE system yet, (i.e. no source RPM has been created yet), I'm going off of the standard config values. Rpm applies it's set of standard patches to create a config -- though those are unique per product in many cases...(samba different from perl different from squid)... Many have their own sub dirs added others don't. There's alot of hand-touch in there from what I have seen -- and it's not always consistent. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org