This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFC] libexecdir

On Jun 20 10:19, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:20:51AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Conflicts like this will happen.  If we change libexec, we have to be
> >prepared for this kind of stuff.  Is it worth it?
> I certainly have gone through this "pain" when the changeover was made
> on Linux.  If we want to provide the real Linux look-and-feel I don't
> think we have any choice.  :-)
> But, seriously, I think that the change makes sense in the long run. If
> we don't do this we'll eventually just have to be tweaking more and more
> configurations to put things in /usr/libexec rather than /usr/lib.

Yeah, probably.  Me and my lawn...

> On a similar note, what about Fedora (and others) fusion of /usr/bin <> /bin
> and /usr/sbin <> /sbin?  Do we want to think about that too?  It would
> certainly make sense for Cygwin.  We could get rid of /usr/bin entirely.

No, we can't.  Fedora has /usr/bin, /usr/lib and /usr/sbin, while the
/bin, /lib, and /sbin paths are just symlinks to their /usr counterparts.
This is necessary to maintain hardcode paths, and this will not go away
in Fedora for a long time.

For Cygwin we did this fusion anyway since version 1.1 or so, just as
mount points and in the other direction.  We were far ahead of time :)

Having said that, we could do the same for /sbin vs. /usr/sbin and
create an automatic mount point for it as well.


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]