Re: /opt/ again (was Re: FreeBSD-like approach for Debian? [was: ...])
Tuesday, September 14, 1999, 1:45:46 PM, Marek wrote:
>> Which would be for what reason?
> When for example it is mounted on a cdrom as a live CD system. Enough?
/usr/local, where you're going to keep local, custom builds of things, is
going to be mounted on a live CD so it isn't writable. Thus making the whole
concept of local modifications (which is what /opt things *are*) moot. No,
not enough.
>> > Assuming you don't care about clean administration of backups (backup
>> > office software with local mods?).
>> Backups are for data, not programs.
> And programs use data. Specific versions of data may be processed by
> specific versions of programs. To access data you need a program. Simple?
So back up the data. I fail to see how "clean administrations of backups"
has anything to do with file system separation.
>> How do they not retain full control of /usr/local? Am I missing something
>> or since when did Debian install commercial software?
> Debian doesn't, people do and will.
That was my point. *People* install commercial software. That makes it
the domain of the [/usr/]local administrator and, thus, he has still retained
full control of /usr/local.
> And you started flamewars again. Stop it.
Flamewars? Please, I have not flamed anyone. I think people around here
have the wrong opinion of a flame war. In case you missed it, this is a flame
war:
YOU PIG FUCKING SON OF A BITCH! GET IT THROUGH YOUR FAT FUCKING HEAD THAT
A FOOBATZ IS NOT THE ANSWER. HOW THE FUCK CAN SUCH A SHITFACED LOSER LIKE YOU
EVER CLAW HIS WAY OUT OF THE SLUMS OF HIS MOTHER'S BELLY IS BEYOND ME!!!
So far I've refuted your statements and used some sarcasm. I have
participated in flame wars in the past, but I rarely start them.
But to answer your statement directly... You start being reasonable and
I'll stop refuting your foolish positions. Deal?
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Reply to: