On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Tobias Oetiker t...@oetiker.ch wrote:
Folks,
I have started to create packages for omnios and I am a bit at a
loss as to packaging 'standards' ...
With omnios getting more popular, I think it would be a good move
to have some standards as to where things
Hi Eric,
Today Eric Sproul wrote:
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Tobias Oetiker t...@oetiker.ch wrote:
Folks,
I have started to create packages for omnios and I am a bit at a
loss as to packaging 'standards' ...
With omnios getting more popular, I think it would be a good move
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 10:24:46 -0400
Eric Sproul espr...@omniti.com wrote:
I have tended to prefer the SysV style of /opt/app or /opt/vendor
so that the entire application set is under a single top-level
directory. This makes it simple to avoid conflicting with apps from
other sources, which
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 16:55:04 +0200, Tobias Oetiker wrote:
from a system management point of view I like to have a simple rule
to decide where the config is and where the 'data' is ...
so keeping the application in /opt/vendor is perfect for the static
part of the application ...
but
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 17:59:47 +0200 (CEST)
Tobias Oetiker t...@oetiker.ch wrote:
having shared libraries in /opt/vendor should not be much of a
when compiling things with -R ... and pkg-config
This is also find by me. I just love the idea of system and userland in
different pools. Consider
Folks,
I have started to create packages for omnios and I am a bit at a
loss as to packaging 'standards' ...
With omnios getting more popular, I think it would be a good move
to have some standards as to where things should go on the system
...
good old
/opt/X
/etc/opt/X
/var/opt/X
come to
