On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 10:47 AM, Dr. Werner Fink <werner@suse.de> wrote:
On 2019/10/18 08:32:29 +0000, Michael Schroeder wrote:
Hi folks,
OBS request 738494 from Neal will change %_libexecdir from /usr/lib to /usr/libexec. This was proposed in July on the opensuse-packaging list with only Thorsten and Jan replying (Jan being in favor).
I don't want to merge it right now without giving you some time to discuss this change. So please, if you have good reasons why this is a bad idea please speak up!
If there are no strong objections, I'll merge the request at the end of next weak.
Ohhmm ... what is about FHS? Ahh .. I see latest FHS knows about:
4.7. /usr/libexec : Binaries run by other programs (optional) 4.7.1. Purpose
/usr/libexec includes internal binaries that are not intended to be executed directly by users or shell scripts. Applications may use a single subdirectory under /usr/libexec. Applications which use /usr/libexec in this way must not also use /usr/lib to store internal binaries, though they may use /usr/lib for the other purposes documented here.
Rationale Some previous versions of this document did not support /usr/libexec, despite it being standard practice in a number of environments. To accomodate this restriction, it became common practice to use /usr/lib instead. Either practice is now acceptable, but each application must choose one way or the other to organize itself.
This seems that we might get packages/applications with /usr/libexec and some with /usr/lib ... do we need an rpmlint check for Factory here?
I would assume we would just need to have a check for executable bits in /usr/lib then, it shouldn't be too hard to do considering such a check already exists for /etc iirc. Considering this is new though, we probably shouldn't force it yet. LCP [Stasiek] https://lcp.world -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org