On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 08:25:15PM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2002 16:53, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> >
> > But kde in /opt is sick. You cannot say:
> > this app is an KDE2 app, so install it in /opt/kde2
> >
> > This way, you do not look at packages which are somewhat
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 04:18:49PM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2002 13:24, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >
> > I will not, under any circumstances, touch /opt. I believe Debian policy
> > prohibits it anyway.
>
> I read the complete section for opt in the FHS. Here is my ana
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 03:39:26PM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2002 14:09, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> > >
> > > You say that like it's a good thing. Mosfet's on drugs.
> >
> > It just happens that piece by Mosfet is well written.
> >
> > Although I cant see how pu
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 03:17:38PM +, James Thorniley wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2002 4:44 am, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> > [Eray Ozkural wrote:]
> > > that's why many RPM's have files in /opt.
> >
> > Ha! RPMs tend to spew files all over the place. Hardly relevant.
> >
> ...
> > > Howeve
On Wed, 16 Jan 2002 20:05:00 -0600 Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 07:40:26PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > Call me crazy, but I've always thought that soft symlinks could be great
> > here:
> > - Put each package in it's own subdir under, say, /pkg.
> > - Next, p
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 07:40:26PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> Call me crazy, but I've always thought that soft symlinks could be great here:
> - Put each package in it's own subdir under, say, /pkg.
> - Next, put symlinks into /usr/bin, /usr/lib, /etc, ad nauseum, in order to
> follow the Debian
Call me crazy, but I've always thought that soft symlinks could be great here:
- Put each package in it's own subdir under, say, /pkg.
- Next, put symlinks into /usr/bin, /usr/lib, /etc, ad nauseum, in order to
follow the Debian Policy.
This way, you could have /pkg/qt2, /pkg/qt3, /pkg/kde2, etc.
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 04:55:17PM +0100, Hendrik Naumann wrote:
-snip-
> - From an sysadmin point of view it is realy nice to have MOST of the
> programms and the mayority of diskspace under /usr. I think many
> networks are planed that way. Shure one could just link /opt to
> /usr/opt and ever
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 11:51:44PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
-snip-
> > * Some proposed using /opt/kde3. Arguments:
>
> Not as a Debian package. /opt is for third-party software.
>
>Julian
perhaps you should have read the rest of the email from him... :)
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 02:48:06AM +0200, Jarno Elonen wrote:
-snip-
> If there were a way to remove symlinks when the original file is removed,
> I think the following structure would be the easiest to understand and
> administrate:
>
> + usr
> + bin
> + qtcups -> ../qtcups/bin/qtcups
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 08:55:02AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> the Dark Ages. When you ask people what the best thing about Debian is,
> they respond "policy" (in general; some say dpkg/apt). So what are we
> doing? Random crap, I hear you say?
Not to mention the fact that one of the major reaso
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 11:19:25PM +0200, Jarno Elonen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> May I try to summarize the filesystem discussion on KDE list and suggest that
> it will continue in debian-policy?
>
> * Many people feel that KDE (and Gnome) is too large
>a whole to be stuffed in /usr/bin, /usr/share
On Fri Dec 14, 2001 Ivan E. Moore II wrote:
> With kde3 my current (and yet truely tested) approach for file layout is
> pretty much everything under /usr/share/kde /usr/lib/kde
> (and /usr/lib/kde3 for the modules) /etc/kde.
Any chance that Chris and Daniel will hold to that?
--
Oliver Johns <[
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 03:31:07PM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2002 13:29, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > Note that *everybody* except debian uses /opt/kde3, and changing to that
> > > would be beneficial. The current layout has to be changed in any case, it
> > > is major
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 12:20 pm, Jarno Elonen wrote:
[snip]
> That said, FHS hardly is, if I have understood correctly, "the optimal
> solution" for anything but rather an educated tradeoff between usefulness
> and compatibility with existing UNIX systems. People generally present
> crique be
Hi,
May I try to summarize the filesystem discussion on KDE list and suggest that
it will continue in debian-policy?
* Many people feel that KDE (and Gnome) is too large
a whole to be stuffed in /usr/bin, /usr/share etc
and would deserve a separate directory like X
* Some proposed using
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 02:06 pm, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2002 20:25, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> > up just in debian. And may I add that KDE hackers loathe the debian
> > packaging somehow? [*] There is some major misu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 20:25, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> up just in debian. And may I add that KDE hackers loathe the debian
> packaging somehow? [*] There is some major misunderstanding there, some
[*] This is my impression from conversations
On Wednesday 16. Januaryta 2002 20:27, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2002 17:41, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> > The problem: where to install libs that come with the package and other
> > might refer to? How to search for installed programs by looking at one
> > direcory (without
Hi,
FWIW and only IMHO: I like that the layout used for KDE is the same
as the rest of Debian.
Nevertheless I agree that there is a 'big' problem with KDE in
Debian
KDE is configured to put config files to
/etc/kde2 but KDE nevertheless uses /usr/share/config
during runti
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 03:43 am, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 01:35:33PM +0200, Jarno Elonen wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16. Januaryta 2002 13:27, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 08:55:16PM +, James Thorniley wrote:
> > > > I'm supported also by Mosfet, see
On Wed, 16 Jan 2002, James Thorniley wrote:
> The fact of the matter is that SuSE and Redhat produce distributions where
> their installation of KDE is compatible with an installation from source of
> KDE from ftp.kde.org.
A default installation of Apache from source installs into /usr/local/etc.
On Wed, 16 Jan 2002, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> It seems that your reasoning that "/opt is reserved for things like Loki
> games" is incorrect. See my mail titled "Interpeting FHS".
>
[...]
>
> That is a serious misunderstanding of "add-on". By add-on here it means
> application software that is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 15 January 2002 23:52, Jens Benecke wrote:
> > Yes. But using subdirs is required when there are too many files rather
> > than the total size of files exceeding a threshold.
>
> Yes, and as soon as you define what "too many" is, those are i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 17:41, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
>
> The problem: where to install libs that come with the package and other
> might refer to? How to search for installed programs by looking at one
> direcory (without masses of symlinks)? How
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 16:53, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
>
> But kde in /opt is sick. You cannot say:
> this app is an KDE2 app, so install it in /opt/kde2
>
> This way, you do not look at packages which are somewhat KDE2 but not
> completely (e.g. l
> > Just as a side note (NOT as a proposition by any means!):
> > what's really so wrong in C:\program files style? Of course, on
> > open systems, instead of vendor specific directories, there should be some
> > other subdirectory policy (lsm for example?).
>
> The problem: where to install libs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi
> > If KDE is packaged for Debian by Debian developers it is not an
> >addon and _does_not_ belong in /opt.
>
> That is a serious misunderstanding of "add-on". By add-on here it
> means application software that is not essential for system
> functi
Am Donnerstag, 17. Januar 2002 01:48 schrieb Jarno Elonen:
> > In my understanding: /opt is for packages that do not fit into the unix
> > file system structure with the defined dirs like bin, lib, etc.
> > What you now want to do with /opt is to make it to something like
> > C:\programs on Windows
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 12:09 pm, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2002 12:27, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 08:55:16PM +, James Thorniley wrote:
> > > I'm supported also by Mosfet, see www.mosfet.org/fss.html for an actual
> > > argument for why dir
> In my understanding: /opt is for packages that do not fit into the unix file
> system structure with the defined dirs like bin, lib, etc.
> What you now want to do with /opt is to make it to something like C:\programs
> on Windows systems.
Just as a side note (NOT as a proposition by any means
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 4:44 am, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> [Eray Ozkural wrote:]
> > that's why many RPM's have files in /opt.
>
> Ha! RPMs tend to spew files all over the place. Hardly relevant.
>
...
> > However, your quote does imply that redhat, suse, etc. packaging which
> > installs in
Am Mittwoch, 16. Januar 2002 15:18 schrieb Eray Ozkural (exa):
> As I said, there is absolutely nothing in the FHS or Debian Policy that
> prohibits installing KDE in /opt. We need to interpret FHS correctly. KDE
> is an application package (a rather big one, though) and it would not be
> incorrect
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 04:18:49PM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> Using /opt for packages doesn't violate the policy in any way. I repeat,
> James *is* right. I suggest you to read it thoroughly before making further
> judgement.
Deciding to use it for KDE would, however, result in large nu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Jadhar,
It seems that your reasoning that "/opt is reserved for things like Loki
games" is incorrect. See my mail titled "Interpeting FHS".
I recommend you to re-read the relevant section of FHS without resorting to
certain preconceptions such a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 13:24, Daniel Stone wrote:
>
> I will not, under any circumstances, touch /opt. I believe Debian policy
> prohibits it anyway.
I read the complete section for opt in the FHS. Here is my analysis.
Using /opt for packages d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 14:09, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> >
> > You say that like it's a good thing. Mosfet's on drugs.
>
> It just happens that piece by Mosfet is well written.
>
> Although I cant see how putting kde in /opt/kde would be more
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 13:32, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Type mismatch here. You were talking about /usr, not /usr/share. Please
> > ignore that earlier comment.
>
> Lucky, because my next reply was "Show me a serious bug on all KDE apps
> and I wil
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 13:29, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Note that *everybody* except debian uses /opt/kde3, and changing to that
> > would be beneficial. The current layout has to be changed in any case, it
> > is major brain damage.
>
> Changing t
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 12:27, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 08:55:16PM +, James Thorniley wrote:
> > I'm supported also by Mosfet, see www.mosfet.org/fss.html for an actual
> > argument for why directory layout should be more logical.
>
> You say that like it's a good thin
> > > > I'm supported also by Mosfet, see www.mosfet.org/fss.html for an actual
> > > > argument for why directory layout should be more logical.
> > >
> > > You say that like it's a good thing. Mosfet's on drugs.
> >
> > No need to get personal, thank you. I personally like some of the guy's
> >
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 01:35:33PM +0200, Jarno Elonen wrote:
> On Wednesday 16. Januaryta 2002 13:27, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 08:55:16PM +, James Thorniley wrote:
> > > I'm supported also by Mosfet, see www.mosfet.org/fss.html for an actual
> > > argument for why direct
On Wednesday 16. Januaryta 2002 13:27, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 08:55:16PM +, James Thorniley wrote:
> > I'm supported also by Mosfet, see www.mosfet.org/fss.html for an actual
> > argument for why directory layout should be more logical.
>
> You say that like it's a good t
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 08:04:30AM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 January 2002 22:59, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> >
> > So /usr/share/apps violates FHS policy? That does not seem to be the case
> > IIRC. Show me the policy in FHS and I will submit a serious bug to all KDE
> > pack
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 11:22:13PM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> However, your quote does imply that redhat, suse, etc. packaging which
> installs in /opt/kde3 is indeed FHS compliant. I wonder who was clueless
> enough to think otherwise upon reading FHS. Daniel and Chris could you please
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 08:55:16PM +, James Thorniley wrote:
> I'm supported also by Mosfet, see www.mosfet.org/fss.html for an actual
> argument for why directory layout should be more logical.
You say that like it's a good thing. Mosfet's on drugs.
--
Daniel Stone
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 11:58:08AM -0800, Oliver Johns wrote:
> The Debian policy is violated, in principle anyhow,
> by the whole X-windows system. It DOES have its own special
> subdirectories. The reason is that it is so large and
> complicated that good sense demands putting it in a specia
On Wednesday 16 January 2002 00:40, Jens Benecke wrote:
> Hey. Where do I get this? A friend of mine has a Compaq laptop (Presario
> 700) and it's all ACPI, no APM. When I press the "powersave" button the
> laptop locks up hard. Of course apmd doesn't work.
$ apt-cache search acpid - whoa :)
But
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 15 January 2002 22:59, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
>
> So /usr/share/apps violates FHS policy? That does not seem to be the case
> IIRC. Show me the policy in FHS and I will submit a serious bug to all KDE
> packages.
Type mismatch here. You
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 15 January 2002 23:05, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
>
> Why would a package having its own special subdirectories violate Debian
> Policy? That is very common practice and it's a good thing for even small
> codes. What exactly do you mean? Show
50 matches
Mail list logo
