on Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 07:18:45AM -0400, Tom Allison (tallison@tacocat.net) wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> >On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 02:35:44AM -0400, Tom Allison wrote:
> >
> >>FHS says that this directory is for "binaries not needed in single
> >>user mode". But then I went over and looked at the /opt which also
> >>seemed rather reasonable as a place to put things.
> >>
> >>It also seems a heck of a lot easier to manage the installation and
> >>(more importantly) the removal of software through the /opt
> >>structure.
> >>
> >>I am wondering if someone could explain to me why /opt isn't used
> >>much if at all and under when circumstances it would be expected to
> >>be used, or not.
> >
> >
> >Debian prefers to leave /opt for the system administrator. Since we
> >have dpkg, there's no need to worry about ease of installation or
> >removal; you should be using the package management tools to do that
> >anyway.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
>
> I concede that this is Debians choice in configuration.
Specifically: it's Policy. The S.A. is assured that nothing under /opt
will be modified by the packaging system.
> Wouldn't it be possible to utilize /opt for big packages (open office,
> mozilla, KDE, Gnome, Java) and still leave /opt for system administrators?
What you'll find in Debian is that packages with large quantities of
related files will create a subdirectory under /usr/lib or /usr/share
for components, for arch-dependent and arch-independent files,
respectively. See Debian Policy 10.7.3.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Data corrupts. Absolute data corrupts absolutely.
-- Ed Self's corollary of Atkinson's Law.
Attachment:
pgpYDruERtsEi.pgp
Description: PGP signature