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

Re: [kde] setting an /opt precedent

On Thursday 17 January 2002 15:21, 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.
> My main concern is that we'll set a precedent here in Debian for this
> sort of behaviour. AFAIK no Debian package has ever touched /opt; in
> fact I'm pretty sure it doesn't even exist on a default install.
> So, please read the thread and state your opinions. I know it's a KDE
> issue, but I feel it affects Debian as a whole, since putting something
> in /opt ("SuSE and RedHat do it, so it *must* be good!"), would set a
> major precedent for Debian.

I think it's important to see that there are lots of people (including me), 
who are definitely against putting packages in /opt (which would be really 
stupid in my opinion, even if the FHS allows it),  but whose problem is more 
a) the current layout really clutters especially /usr/share just a bit too 
much, and 
b) it would be really nice to be able to install kde2 and kde3 separately, 
since, at least in my experience, getting kde3 from cvs is really so much 
more time consuming and error-prone that separate kde3 packages would 
definitely help a lot of people in trying and testing kde3.

concerning a) I think the agreement (as I understood it) to move 
/usr/share/icons to/ usr/share/kde/icons is definitely a very good starting 
point to make people happier about the namespace pollution in /usr/share.
concerning b): I definitely know that this is not exactly trivial and since 
I'm not doing anything to help, it's definitely just a wish and not to be 
considered as a criticism of the current situation in any form

Yven Leist - leist@beldesign.de-

Reply to: