On Mon, 16 May 2011 05:09:37 +0200, Martin Bähr <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 06:00:50PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: >> 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. > > the difference in layouts is exactly the point why both exists.
Good point,... and in /opt the distributor is really fully free in the layout. > my personal rule of thumb is: /usr/local for stuff built from source, > /opt for 3rd party stuff only available as binary. Is about the same what I proposed above after being inspired by another poster here :) Chris. _______________________________________________ fhs-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/fhs-discuss
