Re: [kde] setting an /opt precedent
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Thursday 17 January 2002 18:21, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> However, unfortunately, your above statement
> assumes that policy prohibits use of /opt while it does not, that
> is it does not explain at all how, why, or where it is prohibited.
> It is the same answer saying that "/opt violates policy" I heard
> from many.
What you don't seem to understand, though, is that quite a lot of
people, including Daniel Stone who is the current maintainer,
actually don't care about whether it violates FHS|Policy or not.
They say: Using /opt/kde sucks. Reasons: 1. Sets bad precedent, what
if all Debian packages worked this way? 2. How do you get the
binaries into the path given the fact that you're not allowed to
touch /opt/bin. 3. How can you be sure you're not messing with
third-party or local administrator set up packages?
I agree: Using /opt/kde sucks. And although I share your opinion that
the current solution is not optimal, I think /opt/kde would be way
- ------- Magnus von Koeller <email@example.com> ------
Georg-Westermann-Allee 76 / 38104 Braunschweig / Germany
Phone: +49-531-2094886 Mobile: +49-179-4562940
lp1 on fire (One of the more obfuscated kernel messages)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----