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

Re: A section for commercial software?

On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 10:58:49AM -0600, Eric Schwartz wrote:
> schuller@lunatech.com (Bart Schuller) writes:
> > The only sane distinction to make is between .debs, which try to conform
> > to as many Debian policies as possible, and non-debs, which you untar
> > into /opt.
> > 
> > A .deb unpacking into /opt has no added value to me, it will just help
> > to confuse.
> I confess to not getting the benefit of this.  To me /opt says
> "Third-party stuff".  If I want to drop random non-packged stuff on my
> system, that's what /usr/local is for.  I see no problem with a .deb
> dropping stuff in /opt, if that's where FHS says its contents ought to
> go.

    There are two major benefits to using /opt:

    1) Namespace.  You don't have to worry about a third party deb not
       tracking collisions with new Debian packages.

    2) Exportability.  /usr should be NFS-exportable, possibly sans
       /usr/local, without encumbrance.  Any software, whether it has
       dpkg information or is packaged in a .deb or not, that has a
       one-license-per-machine type policy MUST NOT contaminate /usr.

    The FHS is fully correct in specifying /opt for

Zed Pobre <zed@debian.org> a.k.a. Zed Pobre <zed@resonant.org>
PGP key and fingerprint available on finger; encrypted mail welcomed.

Attachment: pgpr2xoZff8QN.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: