On Thursday 17 January 2002 08:47 pm, you wrote: > > So, what are the "reasons behind Debian not mucking about with > /opt" except the preconceptions of some developers? I think you > would have to say something like: > > * It is not very consistent with the directory layout many packages > adapt > > Is there any other reason? I assume none, since front end files can > be placed by the distribution in usual locations by symlinking or > by wrapper scripts.
The reasons are not "preconceptions," but opinions based on experience with older UN*X systems that had such a layout. My personal reason is the PATH variable. When I was a sys admin at university, we had to maintain the default PATH for all users in a lab. Doing this for all the different packages that went into /usr/local/foo/bin, /opt/bar/bin, and /usr/pkg/baz/bin was a pain in the butt. I also think that your proposed solution of using symlinks and wrapper scripts are inelegant hacks. > Actually the FHS permits use of /opt by distributions you mean. > Please add it to the policy if you have a logical rationale but > then we will have to drop "FHS compliance" from the list of > Debian's features. ;) Just because Debian chooses to disallow something that is permitted (but not required) by the FHS does not make Debian uncompliant with the FHS. > Aside from discussion of /opt policy in FHS: > Note that the mere suggestion of putting KDE files in /opt/kde3 was > because the above reason is not valid for KDE since it is quite > different from the majority of software packages which are smaller > pieces of software designed according to GNU Coding Standards. As a > matter of fact, KDE also obeys GNU Coding Standards to some extent > but it is a very large system and therefore many kde developers > feel that it deserves its own directory; somewhat like X11. That's > all. Your statement is that KDE is different from other software because of its size, and it should be treated differently because of that. I don't think that matters. X11 is a special case because it's been there so long. The FHS is explicit about that: "No large software packages should use a direct subdirectory under the /usr hierarchy. An exception is made for the X Window System because of considerable precedent and widely-accepted practice." Unfortunately, the FHS doesn't explain it's reasons for this prohibition, but I agree with it, so I don't need convincing. That's all, Frank