On Sat, 14.05.11 22:52, Christoph Anton Mitterer ([email protected]) wrote:
> Hi. > > > 1) One idea that could be discussed (although it's very unlikely that this > is accepted) is, whether all of the current "/*/local*" directories are > moved to it's own hierarchy below "/local". > So on would have e.g.: > /local/bin > /local/sbin > /local/usr > /local/etc > /local/var > (and their typical sub-hierarchies). I already have trouble enough understanding why we currently have both /usr/local and /opt. Both appear to be places for 3rd party software, but use different layouts. I am tempted to say that we should just get rid of /usr/local. That said, /opt appears like a pretty badly though out solution. i.e. any package you install there which need drop in files in some system dirs (i.e. dbus service, pk policy and so on), also needs to add something to /etc or /usr, so I really wonder what the point of the separation here. Instead of adding even more places to store 3rd party stuff in we better have a consistent story on what to do about drop-in directories. For example the XDG basedir spec ignores /opt completely, but includes /usr/local in the default search paths. I think it might be a good idea to fix the existing problems first before just wildly relabelling existing directories. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ fhs-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/fhs-discuss
