ext Simon Budig <si...@budig.de> writes: > Marius Vollmer (marius.voll...@nokia.com) wrote: >> The "/opt is hack" statement needs to be qualified, of course. "Moving >> stuff into /opt/maemo" is a hack, of course. But at least in my >> opinion, "Moving stuff into /opt/<package>/" is a bigger hack, and a >> bigger violation of the letter and spirit of /opt. *shrug* > > Uh, I am not sure about this. > > Reading the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/) > it seems that both uses (/opt/maemo/* and /opt/<package>) are covered > by it.
Yes, but <package> is not in the same namespace as the distribution packages. As you point out, one should register the <package> names with Lanana. (I didn't know about this, thanks for the information.) I feel confident that we can get away with "maemo" without registering it. Using /opt/nokia feels wrong, since it gives the impressions that everything under /opt/nokia is actually provided by Nokia, which isn't true, and strictly speaking we would have to use /opt/nokia/maemo anyway since /opt/nokia is for all of Nokia, not just for our little hack here. Anyway, let's not discuss this to death. Patches to maemo-optify are welcome as long as they don't change the current default behavior of putting things in /opt/maemo. _______________________________________________ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
