[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: /usr/local (again)



Richard Kaszeta writes ("/usr/local (again)"):
...
> Since packages generally don't install anything other than empty dirs
> in /usr/local, can't this be handled in a way that makes it easier for
> those of us trying to maintain many debian machines?

Section 3.2.9 of the policy manual may be informative.

I haven't implemented the required feature for dpkg yet.

Ian.

  3.2.9 /usr/local - for the use of the system administrator           
   
   As mandated by the FSSTND no package should place any files in        
   /usr/local, either by putting them in the filesystem archive to be 
   unpacked by dpkg or by manipulating them in their maintainer scripts.
   
   Every package that searches a number of directories or files for     
   something (for example, looking for shared libraries in /lib or       
   /usr/lib) should search an appropriate directory in /usr/local too.   
   
   In order that the system administrator may know where to place   
   additional files a package should create an empty directory in the    
   appropriate place in /usr/local by supplying it in the filesystem
   archive for unpacking by dpkg. The /usr/local directory itself and all
   the subdirectories created by the package should have permissions 2775
   (group-writeable and set-group-id) and be owned by root.staff.        

   In the future it will be possible to tell dpkg not to unpack files 
   matching certain patterns, so that system administrators who do not
   wish these directories in /usr/local do not need to have them.       



Reply to: