On 10.07.21 00:54, Heitor Faria wrote:
That said, I would be very happy to run Bacula on any version of Debian -- the Bacula packagers for Debian work closely with the Bacula project -- I would be a lot happier if they would learn to install it in/opt/bacula instead of spreading it all over the filesystem though.
This will probably never happen due to the FHS rules pointed by Sven. I even spoke with him about that topic in the past. *Maybe* with a very special agreement with the Debian Community such as the one they made with RedHat (I heard of, couldn't find it) to make a few things standard (such as the systemd services).
How would such a special agreement with Debian even look? "Bacula is allowed to be installed under /opt/bacula"?
Trying to get such a thing past the policy editors, the DM and the rest of Debian will either just be a very quick "No." or an endless discussion, with the final result being a "No." again.
To be in Debian proper, all packages have to adhere to the FHS and there are no exceptions. Make a special exception for one package and you will have to allow this for every other package as well.
And with that precedence set once, I believe the only road to the future would then be utter chaos.
And from the sysadmin side I really do appreciate that with Debian packages I know that binaries (and other immutable stuff) will be in /usr, logs will be in /var/log, volatile stuff will be in /var/cache and the configuration will be in /etc.
On the other hand for some commercial software getting installed somewhere in /opt, I really don't know where all the stuff is. Does the software log to /var/log/NAME or /opt/NAME/var/log? Where are the configuration files? etc. etc.
Note: I am not a DD or a DM, but I have been part of the wider Debian community for over 20 years by now, so I believe I know how it "ticks".
Grüße, Sven. _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
