[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Proper location to install shell function libraries?
From: |
Ralf Corsepius |
Subject: |
Re: Proper location to install shell function libraries? |
Date: |
Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:27:59 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 |
On 03/01/2017 05:13 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
The definition of these install variables comes from the GNU Coding
Standards[1]. You mention the installed scripts are machine-dependent
so they should be installed in either libdir or libexecdir. GCS says:
"libexecdir: The directory for installing executable programs to be
run by other programs rather than by users ..."
>
"libdir: The directory for object files and libraries of object
code ..."
Which doesn't really help us decide where to install non-executable
machine-dependent shell fragments.
Note the term "executable programs" in the section on "libexecdir", you
cited above. Shell fragment usually aren't "executable".
Based on this information alone,
libexecdir seems like a reasonable choice. However, looking at what
packages installed on my computer do, libdir seems to be much more
commonly used.
This observation has its reasons (at least under Linux).
- Many distros do not support or did not support libexecdir and favor
$libdir/<package>.
- Many packages do not use libexecdir.
- Putting everything into $libdir/<package> is easier to use.
Ralf