[arch-dev-public] save some kb - ln ;)

[Damir Perisa]

Monday 24 September 2007, Jan de Groot wrote:
 | > i've just found some more - part of the extra/science/r pkg
 | >
 | > /usr/lib/R/share/licenses
 | > /usr/lib/R/share/licenses/LGPL-2.1
 | > /usr/lib/R/share/licenses/Artistic
 | > /usr/lib/R/share/licenses/GPL-2
 | > /usr/lib/R/share/licenses/BSD
 | > /usr/lib/R/share/licenses/LGPL-2
 | >
 | > should i replace them by symlinks?
 |
 | Are these links required? The location of these things are just
 | weird, there's no reason to have the datadir inside the
 | libexecdir, there's not a single piece of common software that
 | does this. Logical would be to have the datadir pointing to
 | /usr/share, where the licenses would appear in
 | /usr/share/licenses, in which case they're not needed anymore
 | because they're already there.

R has its CRAN (like perl's CPAN) that is kind of a package manager 
itself. you can directly in R install pkgs for it through the 
interface, however i maintain (not publicly, only for me and some 
colleagues) R addon packages. 

i have to clean-up R anyway... it has weird places to put things and 
in addition i need to enable support for blas and lapack, that are 
now pkgs in [extra]. a new release is on the way and i will then also 
cleanup the paths.

the links or letting the programm know where the licences are, are 
needed in case the programme itself tries to access licences. e.g. 
KDE apps have this Help:About_ProgrammeXY:License_Agreement in every 
app, that shows a GPL2 licence... this would break i think, if you 
remove it from kde without linking it. 

- D


-- 
.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´
            °        °           °
             °      °            °
     ><((((º>      °              °
                    °            °
                   °            <º)))><
                  <º)))><