cvs commit: BLFS/BOOK/introduction/welcome changelog.xml

Greg Schafer gschafer at zip.com.au
Mon Jan 12 20:19:36 PST 2004


On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 09:40:23PM -0600, llawre wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 09:17:57 +1100, Greg Schafer wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 03:15:17PM -0700, larry at linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
> >> larry       04/01/12 15:15:17
> > 
> >>   +<listitem><para>January 12th, 2004 [larry]: Updated to at-spi-1.3.8,
> >>   +returned --libexec to sbin on gal and gtkhtml until LFS makes the
> >>   +change. gcalctool, gpdf, gucharmap, nautilus-cd-burner, zenity and
> > 
> > Hi Larry
> > 
> > What change?
> 
> There was brief, and I think inconclusive, discussion about libexec files
> being in libexec, bin or sbin on lfs-dev.

There was indeed some discussion. But it was about the putting the libexec
files into saner locations than they were at that time:

http://bugs.linuxfromscratch.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678

i.e. get them out of the general $PATH (some ended up in /usr/sbin which
ain't so bad).

Interestingly, RedHat do have a /usr/libexec. At least recent Fedora does.
It makes me wonder how they claim LSB compliance when they do stuff like
this. They also have /usr/kerberos which is an interesting one. The
libexecdir idea makes sense in theory but it's old and not mentioned in FHS.
My personal preference would be for LFS not to go the /usr/libexec way.

Anyway, thanks for the clarification :-)



More information about the blfs-book mailing list