It appears that, even if we grant that Bacula can be installed under /opt/bacula, the FHS is still violated by installing configuration to /opt/bacula/etc instead of /etc/opt/bacula.
This is a dangerous deviation, because firstly, /opt/bacula cannot be NFS-shared as-is, even among same-architecture hosts, because already we'll have to move /opt/bacula/etc somewhere else, and symlink it. Secondly, even in the absence of shared filesystems, the administrator now needs to record and remember that critical OS configuration is stored under /opt, which is supposed to be, by the FHS, a place where completely replaceable software packages are installed. I won't even get into /opt/bacula/working vs. /var/bacula. It would seem that the developers of enterprise backup software would understand the vastly different backup policies that might be applied to admin-controlled configurations, and variable log/run data, vs. a frequently-updated software package that is downloaded, installed, and run unmodified from its standard location. Not to mention the disk space allocations, the simple ability of an outside party or a new hire to find stuff when it isn't documented, etc. So while it's nice for the Bacula team to take a principled stand on their special needs, I would favor the Debian team's adherence to published standards <https://xkcd.com/927/> so that systems operate as expected for downstream consumers of this software. Sincerely, Robert On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 7:47 AM Gary R. Schmidt <g...@mcleod-schmidt.id.au> wrote: > On 10/07/2021 23:12, Jose Alberto wrote: > > This brings us to other discussions haha. > > > > Installation preference? > > > What's to discuss?? Binaries, scripts, configuration and so on go under > /opt/bacula, messages get logged to syslogd, and if the package spits > mail, have it spit mail somewhere sensible. > > > Compiled or official binaries? > > > After the debacle with OpenSSL - Oh, look, it was Debian who did it - I > find it very hard to trust any of the Linux distros, too many of the > people involved are so very, very, very smart that they refuse to listen > to anybody who has experience in the field. > > So build anything critical from source. > > I'm not quite at the NSA level of, "Delete everything on the supplied > disk(s), compile everything from inspected source, including the kernel, > on a known, safe system", but I'm about one more screw-up or > Poetterer(sp?) away from it. (And in another decade I may have enough > super to be able to recover, and then it's SEP. (Of course, I may take > permanent recovery before then, which means it concerns me even less.)) > > Fortunately, as a known BOFH, (people used to ask me if my name was > Simon, or why don't I have a Kiwi accent), I get to specify how our > systems are configured, and since we use different UNIX and Linux > systems, as well as Windows, having everything in the same place on a > system running XYZ Linux as it does on an AIX system makes life much > easier. > > Cheers, > Gary B-) > > > _______________________________________________ > Bacula-users mailing list > Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users >
_______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
