Re: [kde] setting an /opt precedent
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 05:09:54PM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> On Thursday 17 January 2002 16:21, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > You might note the discussion on debian-kde of late, where Eray is
> > attempting to set a precedent by installing KDE3 into /opt/kde3. Let me
> > first disclose my viewpoint: I think this idea sucks, as you can clearly
> > see from my postings.
> The answer I got when I asked "Why isn't /opt used in Debian ?" has always
> been "/opt violates Debian Policy".
> However on James's message, I read the section and saw that there is no such
> thing in neither the policy nor FHS. I'm only saying that installing packages
> in /opt doesn't seem to violate the FHS in any way. As I explained in my
> messages, "/opt violates Debian Policy" seems to depend on a certain
> assumption that "add-on" means "non-free software supplied by third party
> commercial vendors" whereas in the text of the FHS there is no such
> implication. On the contrary it says distributions can install software in
> /opt, just not touch a few reserved subdirs of /opt.
> However, using /opt may not be a good path to follow for most free software.
> I understand that as well as you do, especially for software following GNU
> Coding Standards it is absolutely unnecessary.
/opt could be used for all non-distribution software. Personally I prefer
the BSD equivalent /usr/local. /opt is a bit too err... SysV-sounding :) for me.
The same Solaris freewares are no more installed within /opt as in the
past. So all 'local' software (commercial or not) can be installed
under /usr/local, also sysadmin's scripts and programs.
/me installs all additional (non-Debian,non-Solaris,etc) software under
those dirs and hates to see other stuff installed there.
They are mine! Keep your hands off :)
Francesco P. Lovergine