[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: GNUstep filesystem layout discussion



On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
<dominik greysector net> wrote:
> On Sunday, 24 August 2008 at 00:20, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Michel Salim <michel.sylvan <at> gmail.com> writes:
>> > - FHS, flattened (like Debian). We would need to override GNUstep-make
>> > to install under %{_libdir} rather than %{_prefix}/lib. It will
>> > require a customized openapp to handle multilib systems
>>
>> I consider this to be the only way to really comply with the FHS as required by
>> the Fedora Packaging Guidelines.
>>
>> And as Axel rightly pointed out, binaries do not belong to /usr/bin/GNUstep/:
>> if they're intended to be run directly, they should be directly under /usr/bin,
>> otherwise they should be under /usr/libexec/GNUstep.
>
> Sounds reasonable, +1.
>
So the consensus so far seems to be for using a flattened layout.
Removing --disable-flattened from gnustep-make actually causes a much
tighter adherence to the FHS, with %{_bindir} and %{_libdir} not
containing any subdirectories.

The one problem I foresee is that application bundles also contain
data files. Putting them in %{_libdir}/GNUstep/Applications would mean
that installing 32-bit and 64-bit versions of a bundle result in the
data files being duplicated. This is probably acceptable, though.

I've summarized the discussion on the Wiki:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/GNUstep

Axel, what do you think? Seems like keeping the unflattened layout
might be too much trouble; if we are already flattening /usr/bin and
/usr/lib*, might as well stick with a flattened layout after all.

-- 
Michel Salim
http://hircus.jaiku.com/


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]