>>>>> "Kayvan" == Kayvan Aghaiepour Sylvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>> "Jean-Marc" == Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jean-Marc> Concerning the /usr vs /usr/local debate, I would think
Jean-Marc> that only stuff packaged and distributed by redhat should
Jean-Marc> go to /usr, since this makes sure that everything in /usr
Jean-Marc> can be changed when upgrading. I am sure that redhat has
Jean-Marc> some kind of directives somewhere about that.
Kayvan> That's not my understanding of the FSSTND and Redhat's
Kayvan> statements regarding /usr/local.
Kayvan> Quoting from the 5.2 installation manual:
Kayvan> 11.1.2 /usr/local in Red Hat Linux
Kayvan> In Red Hat Linux, the intended use for /usr/local is
Kayvan> slightly different from that specified by the FSSTND. The
Kayvan> FSSTND says that /usr/local should be where you store software
Kayvan> that is to remain safe from system software upgrades. Since
Kayvan> system upgrades from Red Hat Software are done safely with the
Kayvan> RPM system and Glint, you don't need to protect files by
Kayvan> putting them in /usr/local. Instead, we recommend you use
Kayvan> /usr/local for software that is local to your machine.
I stand corrected, then.
Kayvan> I'll abide by the group's decision and create RH 6.0 packages
Kayvan> with whatever the official spec file is. I'll continue using
Kayvan> my /usr-based spec file myself. ;-)
It would be nice to make sure that the rpm is relocatable. I do not
remember whether Mate's spec file is.
Anyway, I should not open my big mouth too much on that subject, since
I am not the one who will do the dirty work.
JMarc
