This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [RFC] libexecdir
- From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 17:10:57 +0200
- Subject: Re: [RFC] libexecdir
- References: <51C20788 dot 1070800 at users dot sourceforge dot net> <20130620082051 dot GI1620 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <20130620141952 dot GA6883 at ednor dot casa dot cgf dot cx>
- Reply-to: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
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