FHS location for locally-compiled bytecode

[Ben Finney]

Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at gmail.com> writes:

> Quick question: Why is bytecode considered an alternate binary format?

It is the form of the program that is executed.

> it is portable between architectures so it seems like it could also be
> a candidate for /usr/share.

Possibly, but the FHS seems to consider "executable" versus
"non-executable" a distinction worth making. Is '/usr/share' a good
location for the executable form of a program?

> A related question, though, would be where Debian puts java bytecode
> files.

I'm asking (in this thread) about the FHS, not Debian-specific
practices.

-- 
 \             “The power of accurate observation is frequently called |
  `\        cynicism by those who don't have it.” —George Bernard Shaw |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney