Re: /opt/ again (was Re: FreeBSD-like approach for Debian? [was:

[Steve Lamb <morpheus@rpglink.com>]

    First, could you please not reply at the top?  It forces people to read
the conversation out of order, forces the person replying to reorder the
conversation so his comments flow correctly, etc.  It is just plain wrong.

Tuesday, September 14, 1999, 12:37:35 PM, Jonathan wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Steve Lamb wrote:
>>     That's something I could agree with.  However, isn't that something that
>> is in the goal list for apt at present?  Wouldn't it be better to have the
>> program to do that in /usr/bin and its database in /var somewhere like dpkg
>> and apt are currently?
> *blink* huh?  Do *what* in /usr/bin and /var ?

    The program goes into /usr/bin, the program's data goes into
/var/something/or/other.  Why create a whole new data directory in the /usr
tree (/usr/packages) which is really data for a program.  Data, from my
understanding, goes in /var (despite what Raul thinks, Debian does have some
sane separation for data) and programs and the ilk into /usr.

{morpheus@teleute:/usr/src} which dpkg
/usr/bin/dpkg
{morpheus@teleute:/usr/src} which apt-get
/usr/bin/apt-get

/var/lib/pkg
/var/state/apt

    So, in the hypothetical program that a user would run in a directory to
get some source package, compile it and install it.  The suggestion was for
/usr/packages/.  I was just pointing out that it would be better for the data
to go in /var and the program to be in /usr somewhere.

-- 
         Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
         ICQ: 5107343          | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------