[csw-maintainers] MySQL shared libraries - how about /opt/csw/lib?

[Ben Walton]

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Sat Jan 08 11:38:06 -0500 2011:

> Maciej, it sounds like you are mixing goal objective, with
> implementation.  Isnt your real goal, "to have standardized linking,
> -R/opt/csw/lib whereever possible"?

I think this is Maciej's goal, but for something (like mysql) that
already lives in a separate prefix and requires
-I/opt/csw/$foo/include, etc how much value is one less -R?  To this
end, I think that as long as the bulk of the package is delivered to a
special prefix, the real libraries should live there too.  A symlink
from /opt/csw/lib as a convenience doesn't hurt, but I don't see much
benefit to doing that either.

> In all these kinds of situations, to help our users have an "easy to
> use" experience, we need to make sure our deliverables make sense on
> purely a filesystem basis.

I disagree with this.  Our job is providing packages.  Our job is
_not_ to make things easier to replicate with tools other than the
packaging system.

I think we need to focus on what the packages provide and how they
behave in the rest of the package ecosystem, not on what people may
choose to do at $random_site_x.

While placing all of the 'special prefix' files under the special
prefix does make things like this easier, it shouldn't be either the
point or even a guiding principle.

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302