On 27/10/2007, Reinhard Tartler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Vincenzo Ciancia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Similar issues might happen if one has something in /usr/local/bin, so > > wouldn't it be wise to ask, in the upgrade program, if user wants to > > temporarily rename /usr/local to /usr/local.upgraded during upgrade, so > > things are safer? > > Isn't your email/request rather a pretty good example why installing > software to /usr/local is a bad idea wrt to system upgrades? > > I'd really suggest to install your special libraries, local software > etc. either to /usr/local/$PACKAGE or /srv/local/$PACKAGE or somewhere > else. You can use environment variables or rpath to make them work.
So when should anything go in /usr/local? http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s-sysvinit contains this paragraph "However, because /usr/local and its contents are for exclusive use of the local administrator, a package must not rely on the presence or absence of files or directories in /usr/local for normal operation." You can find another thread on this subject (started by me) here https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2007-May/000857.html Basically if the system tools are going to include /usr/local in their bin and library search paths then /usr/local is pointless. Anything that you put in there must have identical behaviour to the /usr version, but why would you install it if it's behaviour wasn't different? F > -- > Gruesse/greetings, > Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4 > > -- > Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss > -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
