[packages/FHS] introduce /usr/{,local/}libexec directories

[Tomasz Pala]

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 17:35:26 +0200, Jakub Bogusz wrote:

> Note that there are some inter-package consistency requirements.
> 
> And just like some packages having hardcoded /usr/libexec, and "require
> hackery" to use libdir subdirectory, the others have hardcoded /usr/lib**
> for this purpose and would "require hackery" to use libexec.
> 
> Without using libexec consequently, I don't see any profits (single
> place for internal binaries).

There is at least one I've mentioned previously -
we could enforce no-or-only-libdir policy (forbid mixing shared
libraries with other constant-path files within one subpackage).

Whether it is profitable to have not all the private binaries inside
libdir is a matter of taste. Of course, moving 10% is pointless, but if
we managed to move 70% it would significally reduce the libdir clutter.

And - what should be mentioned, introducing /usr/libexec might be a
value ITSELF. Just as you've noticed, some packages require hackery the
either way. Why don't we simply choose to not swing them back and forth?

Remember, FHS stands that it is the APPLICATION's choice which location
it uses. Having that in mind I would stand for not-altering defaults.
The obvious gain: simplified packaging.

>> I don't care about all this GNU/crap either, but using some Fedora
>> systems this directory was really convenient. My personal rationale is
>> 'follow the world', just to avoid being different than all the rest.
> 
> On the other side, the "second half of the world" (Debian/Ubuntu) doesn't
> use libexec. From minorities, e.g. Gentoo uses, Arch doesn't.

I've found an interesting discussion:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/05/msg00565.html

- they didn't have libexec only because it was non-existant in FHS 2.x.
I do however remember, that Ubuntu had libexec some time ago...

Would it be possible, that Debian still uses FHS 2.3?
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html
3.0 is only 2 years old, they might have not switched yet.

Anyway, BSD also uses libexec. And while traversing google I find many
bug reports regarding missing libexec in Debian, which convinces me that
it's also our trouble source not to have it.

-- 
Tomasz Pala <gotar at pld-linux.org>