I'm glad I'm not the only one confused by this. My _habit_ has been to install add-on/outside/development/flaky? sorry, ;-) software in /usr/local but /opt is OK, too.
My /usr/lib is rapidly becoming a compost-heap that looks a lot like c:\windows\system . segg wrote: > Scott Kruger wrote: > > > > "Douglas N. Arnold" wrote: > > > 3. Finally, the RPMs are not compliant with Linux Filesystem Hierarchy > > > Standard (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/), concerning where they install > > > files. My understanding is that everything should be installed into > > > /usr/lib/dx (rather than /usr/local/dx, /usr/dx, or /dx), except that > > > the executable script dx should be moved or copied into /usr/bin/dx, > > > and the man page should be moved or copied into /usr/man/man1/dx.1. > > > > Actually this isn't correct. All third party software should go into > > either /usr/local or /opt. The idea is that you can have /usr/local > > or /opt on a separate disk partition so that when you do a fresh install > > which reformats the / partition space, it leaves your /usr/local or /opt > > directory intact - no having to reinstall all of your software (although > > in the case of Linux the libraries change so much you probably have to > > anyway, but in the case of Solaris you can upgrade for years without > > having to touch the /opt structure). > > > > As for whether it should be in > > /opt or /usr/local, I've never really understood, other than that the > > standard says that /opt should be used for "Add-on packages". Does > > that include rpm's? I've seen many SysAdmins just soft link /opt to > > /usr/local to avoid the whole mess. > > After reading this FHS 2.0 again, the choice of /opt has my preference > for opendx home. I have the same interpretation as Scott Kruger, > and I like tradition, plus technical advantages. > > Gilles J. Seguin
