On Sunday 02 March 2003 09:44 pm, Daniel Carrera wrote: > On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 05:30:26AM +0100, Terje Kvernes wrote: > > > Why doesn't /opt work? I've looked at the FHS section on /opt and I > > > don't see what's wrong with /opt/gnome and /opt/kde. > > > > because stuff in /opt is supposed to be static packages, not > > dependent on anything else on the system, least of all other > > packages (heck, formally even depending on glibc is bad). this also > > works the other way around, no packages should ideally depend on > > anything located in /opt. > > Oh. The full magnitude of the problem suddenly dawns on me. > > /opt is bad because it's contents are not supposed to be dependent on > anything else. /usr/local is bad because it's meant for non-distribution > packages. /usr/share is bad because it's meant for read-only data. That > only leaves /usr, but that conflicts with FHS. > > I guess that all that can be done is change the FHS. I'll post an email > to the LSB-Future mailing list tomorrow. They are currently discussing > what to do about KDE and Gnome. Perhaps a not-too-distant version of the > LSB will offer a solution. > > Thanks for clarifying all this.
I wish you luck. I tried this at least a year ago, and I got no response whatsoever. My general impression has been that the FHS/LSB bunch are more interested in superimposing their narrow view of the world on the world than actually solving problems. -- Collins Richey - Denver Area Athlon-XP gentoo 1.4_rc2 kde 3.1 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
