[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary
From: |
Linas Vepstas |
Subject: |
Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary |
Date: |
Mon, 3 May 2004 09:49:00 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 01:21:52PM -0700, Mike Gran was heard to remark:
>
> Where's the best place for the Guile script? Best, in this case, means
> most foolproof for the the desktop user that is going to download the
> program as a pre-compiled package. Dot file? In the library? Is
> there a "right" way or a "standard"?
I beleive that /usr/share/your-app-name is the right place.
This is where most apps put scripts, glade files, other bits
and pieces that are cpu/arch independent (i.e. don't contain
cpu-spcific compiled bits), and don't require per-machine
changes, and are static/unchanging. This allows clever sysadmins
to NFS-mount /usr/share read-only on a bunch of clients.
Yes, theres a standard, FSSTND or something like that, the
'file system heriarchy standard', all major distros including redhat
and suse are now certified as conforming.
--linas
--
pub 1024D/01045933 2001-02-01 Linas Vepstas (Labas!) <address@hidden>
PGP Key fingerprint = 8305 2521 6000 0B5E 8984 3F54 64A9 9A82 0104 5933
- Packaging a guile-enabled binary, Mike Gran, 2004/05/02
- Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary, Thamer Al-Harbash, 2004/05/02
- Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary, Mike Gran, 2004/05/02
- Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary, Linas Vepstas, 2004/05/03
- Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary, Mike Gran, 2004/05/03
- Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary, Rob Browning, 2004/05/14
- Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary, Marius Vollmer, 2004/05/15
- Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary, Rob Browning, 2004/05/15
- Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary, Marius Vollmer, 2004/05/17
- Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary, Marius Vollmer, 2004/05/24
Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary,
Linas Vepstas <=
Re: Packaging a guile-enabled binary, Paul Emsley, 2004/05/04