Re: FreeBSD-like approach for Debian? [was: Re: Deficiencies in Debian]
On 15-Sep-99, 03:05 (CDT), Daniel Quinlan <quinlan@transmeta.com> wrote:
> If the length of the PATH is a serious problem, we could potentially
> to make /opt/bin front-ends a requirement. However, you then have
> to solve (or at least ignore) the problem of potential namespace
> conflicts. Add-on applications tend to be very cavalier about
> including binaries named things like "setup", "install", and "start".a
Right. So now the physically seperated add-on packages are no longer
physically seperated, and must worry about integration issues with other
add-on packages. What was the advantage of "/opt" again? Okay, I know
it's a matter of degree, but I just don't get it.
In any case, the whole argument doesn't apply to Debian. Debian is not
an ISV, we are an OS distributor, and the packages we deliver need to be
integrated into the OS filesystem structure.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland <vmole@swbell.net>
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
Reply to: