> In the Nov 2000 on page 38 is an article titled: "Where to Install My
> Products on Linux?".
Mike...what magazine are you referring to here? I've heard about the FHS
but have yet to see the standard in document form.
> According to the FHS ver1 (Filesystem Hierarchy Standard) you would expect
> to find acroread in /opt/Acroread4.0/bin (with symlink maybe to /opt/bin
> where /opt/bin is added to PATH), it's man page in /opt/Acroread4.0/man1
I suppose I'd need to read the standard to understand the rationale for
using symlinks here (why not just put the executable in /opt/bin and stuff
any accessory files in Acroread4.0) but at least this would allow us to
set up a separate /opt partition so that our app installations wouldn't
clutter up the OS partitions.
> That article is actually very useful for developers and sysadmins as it
> leads you through a sample install of "whizbang-1.2.3.i386.rpm" a fictional
> package and even discusses the .spec file needs.
Would love to hunt it down. We get our magazines a bit later here in
Quebec so maybe, by the time you tell me what mag it is, I'll be able to
pick it up.
> But you are correct...very few developers or distro vendors pay more than
> lip service to the FHS and wonder why packages step all over each
> other...(sigh).
This really seems odd to me as it's hard to understand why the app
developers would care. It seems, however, that the distro guys would push
for this kind of standardization and yet they're sticking all kinds of
stuff in /usr/bin that the developers are putting elsewhere. If they're
going to change its location they could just as easily put into the FHS
location.
If I were running a distro company and claiming I wanted world domination
I'd sure be standardizing how applications are handled and where they are
located.
Cheers --- Larry
