On Monday 03 March 2003 01:43 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Quoting Daniel Carrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Oh. The full magnitude of the problem suddenly dawns on me. > > > > /opt is bad because it's contents are not supposed to be dependent on > > anything else. /usr/local is bad because it's meant for non-distribution > > packages. /usr/share is bad because it's meant for read-only data. That > > only leaves /usr, but that conflicts with FHS. > > > > I guess that all that can be done is change the FHS. I'll post an email > > to the LSB-Future mailing list tomorrow. They are currently discussing > > what to do about KDE and Gnome. Perhaps a not-too-distant version of the > > LSB will offer a solution. > > Whatever solution is adopted should ideally provide a *general* solution to > this. Enlightenment, TheNextNewHugeProject, and any number of other things > could benefit as well. Indeed, it would be nice if multiple versions of > anything people feel they need to keep multiple versions around for could > be supported. > > In other words, I'd be disappointed if /usr/kde, /usr/qt, and /usr/gnome > were simply added to the 'exceptions list' for /usr (joining its only > current member, 'X11R6'). A scalable solution, mappable to any future > large project, is what IMHO is needed...the easiest and most obvious > possibility being the addition of a directory such as /usr/pkg, which in > turn can contain /usr/pkg/kde/3, /usr/pkg/gnome/2.2, /usr/pkg/qt/3, and so > on. >
This is all fine and dandy, but you need to direct this to LSB, and rational logic doesn't seem to go very far with that group. -- Collins Richey - Denver Area Athlon-XP gentoo 1.4_rc2 kde 3.1 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
