[Fedora-packaging] Mono Packaging Issues

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le mercredi 14 juin 2006 à 15:34 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway a écrit :
> On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 22:17 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > Le mercredi 14 juin 2006 à 14:56 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway a écrit :
> > 
> > > If the mono package does not include .so files, it should be BuildArch:
> > > noarch and use /usr/lib.
> > 
> > Why on earth do you want it in /usr/lib if you know it's
> > arch-independant ?
> 
> Because they're still libraries, in a weird perverted Windowsy way?

So what ?
Are their any less libraries than jar files ? lisp packages ? 

All those end up in /usr/share in Fedora now, as the FHS demands

The "it's code, therefore it shouldn't go in /usr/share" argument is
bogus. We have a ton of code in /usr/share, both shared and app-specific

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20060614/126b5e18/attachment.sig>