[Opendnssec-user] Re: scripts without she-bang in /usr/lib/packagename/ (fwd)

Jerry Lundström jerry at opendnssec.org
Thu Nov 17 20:58:03 UTC 2011

But /usr/share is a better place since its scripts and can be shared
between platforms.


On 17 nov 2011, at 21:28, Paul Wouters <paul at xelerance.com> wrote:

> FYI, that's what I will do
> Paul
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 01:09:47PM -0500, Paul Wouters wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>>> When you talk about scripts, do you mean that the code calling these scripts
>>> does the equivalent of this (note, I generated my examples by reading up on
>>> ruby on the web just prior to posting... please allow for this perhaps not
>>> being real ruby code :-))::
>>> system('/usr/lib/packagename/foo.rb')
>>> or this::
>>> require '/usr/lib/packagename/foo.rb'
>> This is what is used.
>>> Foo::run()
>>> or this::
>>> system('/usr/bin/ruby /usr/lib/packagename/foo.rb')
>>> The first example needs a shebang.  The second example should be mode 0644
>>> and you could place them in /usr/share/packagename/.
>> Ahh. I thought /usr/share should not contain any executable code, including
>> modules. But I cannot find a clear reference to that on
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
>> I'll talk to upstream about the default install location, as I think it would
>> not be wise for the fedora package the hack those paths.
> <nod>  And also note -- the use of /usr/lib (*not* %{_libdir}) vs /usr/share
> is debatable (I said "could" above rather than should).  The modules that go
> into the default search path, for python, perl, and ruby, for instance, all
> end up in /usr/lib if they're written purely in the scripting language.
> The arguments for either side are:
> /usr/share => shareable between architectures.  Thus a sysadmin can save on
> disk space by network mounting /usr/share and all the files it contains on
> any of the systems they manage.  Most scripting language modules fit into
> this.
> /usr/lib => for object files, libraries, and internal binaries.  The script
> modules are code being used inside of an executable.  So there is a case to
> be made to have them fall under the "libraries" definition.
> I don't think this is something to get into a big fight with upstream about;
> leaving the files 0644 and ignoring rpmlint is valid in this case.
> -Toshio
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> _______________________________________________
> Opendnssec-user mailing list
> Opendnssec-user at lists.opendnssec.org
> https://lists.opendnssec.org/mailman/listinfo/opendnssec-user

More information about the Opendnssec-user mailing list