Re: KDE filesystem structure
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 06:07:42AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 07:20:08PM +0100, Jens Benecke wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 03:15:21PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >
> > > Like I've told you before, KDE3 is not my department. The extent of
> > > my KDE3 influence is talking to Chris on IRC; something I suggest you
> > > do if you want to become involved in KDE3 packaging.
> > actually, why doesn't Debian go the /opt/kde3 or /usr/kde3 way, li..
> > ..e only argument from Debian people I've heard so far is that it is
> > 'evil'.
> And HEINOUSLY violates that little "policy" thing of ours that no-one
> cares about.
Actually, I care about the policy. That's one reason I chose Debian. Be
absolutely sure to have no non-free software in a default installation. (A
"default" ( = 1.7GB, KDE, Staroffice5.2) installation of SuSE 7.3 has
twelve /opt/ subdirs with things like Java, Staroffice, Realplayer, etc etc
etc.)
I care about policy so much that I will never stop questioning and
criticising it. I don't think the Debian policy is ideal, it's a good idea
for now. There will be a time when the policy will and must be revised and
changed because circumstances change.
> You put your own stuff in /opt/kde[23], that's what it's for - your *own*
Yes, /opt can stay taboo. Right. What about additional subdirs in /usr?
Actually, *my* problem with the current setup would be partly solved if
mutually incompatible versions of KDE used seperate data directories.
Something like /usr/share/applnk{2,3}, ~/.kde{2,3} etc. The binaries would
have to be seperated as well, though. Somehow.
I do realize that this breaks the NFS-sharability of /usr/share etc. but I
also think that such setups are seldom enough that they shouldn't make it
hard for many more users who want to have more flexibility installing local
apps and compiling KDE programs themselves. After all, disk space is cheap.
> stuff. For packagers, it's another /usr/local - touch and burn. Also, in
> general, putting random subdirs under /usr is exceedingly bad practice,
> and it also violates that little policy thing. (Bear in mind that the
> FHS is also policy).
Then why are /usr/X11, and /usr/games, and so on still there?
(watch out. rhetorical question.)
--
mfg, Jens Benecke
http://www.jensbenecke.de/ - Persönliches
http://www.hitchhikers.de/ - Europas Mitfahrzentrale (car sharing agency)
Politics is like a septic tank - all the big shits float to the top.
Reply to: