Re: /usr/local again
Well, I can see your point: /usr/local is stricly for local use.
But, I think the Debian extension is a good one.
If a package creates a directory under /usr/local, so long as that does
not overwrite something else that was there, and so long as it puts no
files there, I think thats ok.
On removal, that package should remove the directory, if and only if,
it is empty, and is not a link.
Yes, I know this is not exactly FHS, but it's convenient for the admin
(thats me).
On Sat, 12 Feb 2000, Steve Robbins wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Feb 2000, Jordi wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 09, 2000 at 09:55:45AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > > IMHO, /usr/local should be for local system administrator use, and no
> > > package should ever touch it (although setting up default search paths
> > > to include /usr/local is probably a good idea).
> >
> > From Debian-Policy:
> >
> > However, the package should create empty directories below /usr/local
> > so that the system administrator knows where to place site-specific
> > files. These directories should be removed on package removal if they
> > are empty.
> > [...]
> > Since /usr/local may be mounted read-only from a remote server, these
> > directories have to be created and removed by the postinst and prerm
> > maintainer scripts. These scripts must not fail if either of these
> > operations fail. (In the future, it will be possible to tell dpkg not
> > to unpack files matching certain patterns, so that the directories can
> > be included in the .deb packages and system administrators who do not
> > wish these directories in /usr/local do not need to have them.)
> >
> >
> > So, as someone said before, if the package only removes directories below
> > /usr/local, it should be ok if the script does not fail even if it cannot
> > write/delete there.
>
> I disagree with the notion that a package out to be messing around with
> /usr/local AT ALL. Not even creating or removing directories.
>
> Creating and removing empty directories _sounds_ innocuous, but it is
> bound to surprise someone eventually --- witness the message that started
> this thread! Now you might argue that it was "just a bug" in some
> package's postrm script or whatever. True, but: packaging is a
> complicated process, and something similar is bound to occur again.
>
> The real bug is the policy quoted above. The "/usr/local" hierarchy
> should be understood to be just that: LOCAL. Nothing in Debian should
> touch it. Ever.
>
> I think the Debian policy ought to be changed.
>
> In fact, the policy is a bit unclear or perhaps contradictory. Just above
> policy section quoted above, we see:
>
> 3.1.1 Linux File system Structure
>
> The location of all installed files and directories must comply
> with the Linux File system Hierarchy Standard (FHS). The latest
> version of this document can be found alongside this manual or on
> http://www.pathname.com/fhs/.
>
> Hmm. It says the *location* of directories must comply with FHS. Why
> doesn't this read simply "The Debian file system must fully comply with
> FHS"? Is it intended that Debian follow the FHS only in *location* but
> not in *intent* or *use* of directories? For instance, FHS allows the
> directory location /usr/lib. Can I ignore the *intent* of /usr/lib, and
> put a user-executable binary in it? Or am I reading too much into this
> bit of --- oddly-worded, to my eyes --- policy?
>
> Well, let's assume that I'm reading too much into this, and that the
> Policy writers really intended that Debian be fully FHS compliant.
>
> Then the bit of Debian Policy about /usr/local contradicts the FHS section
> found at http://www.pathname.com/fhs/2.0/fhs-4.6.html. Paraphrasing, this
> page says that after a fresh install, this hiearchy may contain *empty*
> subdirectories bin, games, include, lib, sbin, share, and src, and nothing
> else.
>
> I prefer the FHS way, and propose that Debian adopt it.
>
> (Otherwise, I'll have to adopt /usr/local/really-local/{bin,lib,etc} as
> the place for local stuff that Debian won't touch!)
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
--
If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange apples
then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have
an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each
of us will have two ideas -- George Bernard Shaw
Reply to: