Thu Jun 20 08:20:00 GMT 2013
On Jun 19 14:33, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> The Linux Foundation has taken over development of the FHS, and
> have added /usr/libexec to the forthcoming 3.0 spec, based in its
> widespread use in some Linux distributions and other *NIX systems
> (*BSD, Minix, perhaps others).
> Should we do the same on Cygwin by changing the default cygconf()
> flags in cygport? It will mean some changes to [PKG]_CONTENTS will
> be necessary for packages relying on the current
> --libexecdir=/usr/lib default (gcc and git come to mind).
I'm not all too keen to get the /usr/libexec dir, but I noticed that
it's used already anyway.
I have no strong opinion against this change, and I do hope that this
only results in a few cygport file changes, but I think this will also
result in some problems.
Let's say, for instance, the inetutils package changes the installation
path of its daemons. This affects the inetd.conf file, which could
also be changed by the user to start other stuff.
Or, take the openssh package, which has sshd as well as its tools
installed into /usr/sbin right now. If we move them, we may end up
breaking user scripts.
Conflicts like this will happen. If we change libexec, we have to be
prepared for this kind of stuff. Is it worth it?
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
More information about the Cygwin-apps