Re: [forward] FHS pre-2.1 draft #3 on web site
Raul Miller <raul@usatoday.com> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 1999 at 05:51:09PM -0700, Chris Waters wrote:
> > There was nothing stopping them from creating links in /usr/local/bin
> > either -- why would they get the hint all of a sudden from /opt/bin
> > when they didn't from /usr/local/bin? I think that /opt/bin is a bad
> > idea in the first place -- it offers *nothing* that /usr/local/bin
> > doesn't already provide; has no advantages whatsoever; and encourages
> > the nasty habit of using /opt, which I think should be encouraged to
> > disappear completely. :-)
> I'll guess from this that you've not read FHS chapter 2.
Yes, I've read chapter 2, and I just reread it. What about it? I see
nothing there that contradicts what I said above. Both /usr
(including /usr/local) and /opt are static and sharable, so what's the
problem? In fact, that's pretty much how it has to be -- by the very
nature of the beast, /opt has most characteristics in common with
/usr. It's essentially an area for third-party vendors to have their
own "private" little /usr-like trees. So, it has to be set up like
/usr, so links from /usr/local to /opt shouldn't be a problem.
If you're worried about them being on separate partitions, and maybe
not always being mounted at the same time, well, ok, that may be an
issue, but that doesn't seem to have anything to do with chapter 2.
If that's the issue you're trying to raise, why not raise it instead
of mumbling about irrelevencies? :-)
> > I think we should *support* the /opt nonsense, since it's effectively
> > a requirement, but I think we should stop short of encouraging or
> > promoting its use.
> This implies that creating directories is not support.
No, it implies that creating these unnecessary, redundant, and
arguably just-plain-*wrong* directories is *more* support than the
whole /opt tree needs or deserves. :-p ;-)
Basically, while it may be a form of support, I think it's crossing
the line from support to promotion, and I don't want to promote the
use of /opt.
> Personally, I think that the existence of the directories will simplify
> the documentation [...]
Yeah, that could be. Is it worth it? I don't know -- my gut feeling is
that it's not, but then I (obviously) dislike the whole /opt
heirarchy. I've just seen it get too messy and ugly, even *with*
reasonably competent admins setting up links and such.
But at this point, I think I've said all there is to say on the
matter. I think the whole thing is pretty minor in any case, and this
tempest is about to overflow our little teapot here. If you're *that*
determined to encrust our poor innocent system with the foul,
odiferous sewage of /opt, heck, I'll live. :-)
--
Chris Waters xtifr@dsp.net | I have a truly elegant proof of the
or xtifr@debian.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file.
Reply to: