On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Mariusz Pekala wrote: > On Fri 9. November 2001 15:05, you (tc lewis) wrote: > > yeah, i use a bunch of djb's stuff. with daemontools, check out the > > "package/install" file that you're supposed to run to install it. it just > > executes other commands. well, if you just run the package/compile > > script and not the other 2, it'll dump the binaries in a "command" > > directory. you can copy them wherever you want from there. > > Okay, I traced it to this point. I was only wondering if I REALLY can move > the binaries somewhere, where they may be reached by standard PATH variable > mean. I was affraid that the dns binaries (for example) may have hardcoded > locations of the daemontools binaries (for security, for example). > If you say I can copy them, I believe you. :-)
to the best of my knowledge, you can copy them wherever you want and they'll work just fine. i vaguely remember doing that on some system at some time a few months back but i can't seem to locate which system that was so who knows? i can't make any guarantees, but i'm pretty sure you won't have any problems doing that. note that some programs like svscanboot might be hardcoded to run in /service or what not, but that's not really the same issue. you should still be able to use svscan, supervise, svc, multilog, setuidgid, and all those other goodies without issue assuming they get in your $PATH somewhere. > > the djbdns package you can put wherever you want by modifying the > > "conf-home" file before compiling it, although that will probably change > > in the future sometime whenever there's another release. > > > > note that i'm not recommending you do anything. i support the /package > > and /command ideas. but you're welcome to do as you wish. > > I am not sure which approach is better. Use your own directory structure or > try to conform FHS... > I administer another system (SunOS) where, over years, I created non-standard > directory structure... Now I regret. But, on the other side it's a little > easier to backup related data and binaries with this structure... But on the > other side... :) > Anyway, I believe it's good to keep the / directory as clean as possible. > (I also hate Windows programs/divers/anything that go to c:\ instead of > c:\program files) opinions are obviously widely-varied. /package and /command and /service and such is just another standard. who's to say that the linux fsstd that redhat employs is better than this one that djb thought up? i think /package makes a lot of sense and install almost all my software under that kind of heirarchy. but redhat's layout is surely much more popular and widespread, so i can see how people wouldn't want to deviate from it. to each his own! -tcl. _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
