Re: Conflict/dependency granularity
Bill Mitchell writes ("Re: Conflict/dependency granularity"):
> Richard Kettlewell <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > The FSSTND says, among other things:
> > Locally installed software should be placed within /usr/local rather
> > than /usr unless it is being installed to replace or upgrade
> > software in /usr.
> It's be splitting semantic hairs, but the argument could be made that
> the operator might become dissatisfied with a debian-provided binary
> for some reason or another and decide to replace it with locally-installed
> software. This would seem to be permissable under the passage quoted
> above. We'd silently overwrite his locally-installed software at the
> next upgrade of the package containing the files he'd replaced.
That is entirely what the user ought to expect.
Supposing they install (say) the Pentium-GCC, as /usr/bin/gcc, &c. If
they then install the next version of Debian's GCC package they
should expect what they get - namely, Debian's GCC package installed.
> As someone else said -- gotta draw the line somewhere. We just need to
> decide where to draw the line, draw it, and let interested parties know
> where the line is.
The line is the /usr/local mountpoint (well, it may not be a
mountpoint, but you get my drift).