Re: API freeze release ... status so far.
- From: Sander Vesik <Sander Vesik Sun COM>
- To: Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>
- Cc: Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>, gnome-2-0-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: API freeze release ... status so far.
- Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 21:30:02 +0100 (BST)
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
> Section 4.5 of the FHS:
> /usr/lib includes object files, libraries, and internal binaries that
> are not intended to be executed directly by users or shell scripts.
>
> and Section 4.8:
> The /usr/share hierarchy is for all read-only architecture independent
> data files. (...) thus, for example, a site with i386, Alpha, and PPC
> platforms might maintain a single /usr/share directory that is
> centrally-mounted.
>
> I think one should read "Architecture independant" as "if it's not an
> executable and it isn't compiled for a specific architecture"
Well, a .pc file isn't really 'acructecture independant data file', just
like Havoc argued - it is something that could just aswell be compiled
into the .so file if it wasn't slightly easier to have it as a separate
file (esp. as long as libtool is a shell script).
> If what you're telling me is that there might be a .pc for a library
> available one arch, and not for the other, I could argue that the same
No - the contents of the .pc file can and will vary between different
architectures. As a matter of fact, the contents of the .pc file may
easily be different for the 32 and 64 bit libraries on solaris/sparc...
> problem would happen if 2 versions of one application have different
> layouts under their /usr/share/application dir (and different versions
> are available on the platforms), or if a bonobo component is available
> on one platform and not the other (/usr/share/oaf)
>
No, not really.
> Maybe that's just me being picky...
>
> Cheers
>
Sander
I haven't been vampired. You've been Weatherwaxed.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]