Re: lilypond puts a shared library in /usr/share

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

Thomas Bushnell BSG <address@hidden> writes:

> address@hidden (Pedro Kröger) writes:
>
>>> This is very bad mojo and a violation of the GNU coding standards,
>>> which require that /usr/share is only for architecture independent
>>> files.
>>
>> really? I thought that /usr/local/share was for architecture independent
>> files:
>>
>> "The root of the directory tree for read-only architecture-independent
>> data files. This should normally be /usr/local/share" [1]
>
> Isn't that what I just said?

I see the distinction you were making.

No, /usr/share and /usr/local/share have the same semantics.  Of
course, lilypond installs by default into /usr/local/share; I said
/usr/share only because I configure with --prefix=/usr and forgot that
this isn't standard.

The bug is there regardless of the value of --prefix; $(datadir) is
only for architecture independent files.