on Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 07:18:45AM -0400, Tom Allison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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.
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
