On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 10:38:14AM -0400, Jan Schaumann wrote: > Anthony Towns <[email protected]> wrote: > > > LSB compliant packages have to "adhere to the FHS 2.2". Does this > > mean they should put their files in /opt and /etc/opt? Or just that > > they can't put them in /FooCorp? If they have to put them in /opt and > > /etc/opt, should they install symlinks in /usr/bin so you can easily > > use their program? > > Hi all, > > sorry if this has been discussed before, but I really like Debian's way > of using /etc/alternatives as a place for variable symlinks. Also, as > far as I understand the FHS, "/usr/local/bin" should be the place where > to install binaries to anyway, not "/usr/bin", right?
no, /usr/local is for sysadmin installed software, not packaged
software. though i suppose proprietary crap falls into that catagory
most of the time.
>
> So I'd probably suggest a package to install as follows:
>
> /opt/package/
> /opt/package/bin/
> /opt/package/bin/executable
> /opt/etc/packagerc
good
> /usr/local/bin/exectuable -> /etc/alternatives/executable
> /etc/alternatives/executable -> /opt/package/bin/executable
why? this isn't needed.
better soltution is the /opt method above, and the following addition
to /etc/profile:
if [ -d /opt/bin ] ; then
PATH="${PATH}:/opt/bin"
fi
or something like that.
--
Ethan Benson
http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
pgpmW0LIn2OXH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
