> Hey Dennis, > > thanks for starting a discussion on this topic.
Actually someone else hit me over the head and I was motivated :-) > Looking at /opt on my systems, I see that CSW ain't the only > package-hierarchy that is having config files not under /etc/opt. Even IBM/Lotus Domino is guilty of this with all its config data typically under /opt/lotus . Well, truth is I can have a dozen Domino servers running with thir data directories all over the place and then links that point all over the place. Not pretty but I have seen it done. > I really appreciate consistency and standard compliance, me too > and looking at others, e.g. /opt/schily, Actually J?rg is really good about sticking to standards and I will bet that config files for his tools will relocate to /etc/opt/schily. I may be wrong. He is a great guy to get involved here because he has worked with UNIX forever. > which is also having its config files in /opt/schily/etc and > not /etc/opt, I'm wondering, what kinds of hassles one would go through when > trying to achieve SVR4 compliance. just code changes mostly .. minor stuff really. > The first step could probably be to get CSW to be SVR4 compliant and > resulting of the experiences in benefits/flexibility achieved by this > change, others might be intrigued to go from /opt/$package/etc to using > /etc/opt/$package. Hey, I figure with the build system at Blastwave it will be easy to crank out the entire software stack from top to bottom, full build, and we can just make the code changes needed to point to /etc/opt/foo. It may be timeconsuming at first but no big deal. This is not rocket science or assembly language :-) > I'm really wondering why this thread has been so quiet since it's creation dunno ... could be that its the weekend and its spring time ? Of course its the fall in the land of OZ. I dunno .. but lets work together with what we have eh ? Dennis ps: that's the first time in a long time that I used my Canadian "eh".
