From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_MISSING, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (h014.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.242]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 745A5ABD5F for ; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 22:08:04 -0500 (CDT) Received: (cpmta 19310 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 20:08:03 -0700 Received: from 64.34.192.49 (HELO silver.perimeter) by smtp.directvinternet.com (209.228.33.242) with SMTP; 2 Jul 2002 20:08:03 -0700 X-Sent: 3 Jul 2002 03:08:03 GMT Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Why the FHS can't be followed From: Fuper To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20020703015424.GB3221@ogremage.dslxtreme.com> References: <20020701173735.5d1093ae.erichey2@attbi.com> <200207021410.00311.jsmith@kcco.com> <20020702200608.GB5646@ogremage.dslxtreme.com> <200207021700.15940.jsmith@kcco.com> <20020703015424.GB3221@ogremage.dslxtreme.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.5 Date: 02 Jul 2002 22:08:02 -0500 Message-Id: <1025665683.2980.120.camel@silver.perimeter> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: 97f441f4-a87b-4abe-b01f-17303e7f5248 X-Archives-Hash: c6d3785e981169f09f0f79427a053841 On Tue, 2002-07-02 at 20:54, Luke Ravitch wrote: > I'd be okay with something like: > > /usr > +--->X11R6 > +--->gnome > | +--->1 > | +--->2 > +--->kde > +--->2 > +--->3 > So I vote for one of the above to layouts. Picking the right one is a > matter of decided which gives the best breadth/depth ratio. I agree. The whole discussion seems to move toward that conclusion. I also now agree that Gentoo is not FHS compatible because it defines non-standard directories in /usr. Now, as for Stow -- I beat you up for not loving Stow! I may find some drawbacks in the future that are not apparent to me now but it seems to me that the tiny Stow script makes it possible to install, upgrade, and remove software packages without depending on a database to track all of the files. For example, I can answer the following questions without reference to an rpm or dpkg (or portage) database: Q: Which files were installed by FramerD? (A: All of the files in /usr/local/stow/framerd-2.3/ Q: How can I upgrade mit-scheme from version 7.7 to 7.7.1? (A: cd /usr/local/stow; stow -D scheme-7.7; stow scheme-7.7.1 Q: Which binaries are used for accessing Wordnet? (A: ls /usr/local/stow/wordnet-1.7/bin or ls -l /usr/local/bin | grep wordnet That last one works because every binary is symlinked into local/bin and so ls -l gives a clear view of what package each binary belongs to; e.g. wishwn -> ../stow/wordnet-1.7/bin/wishwn wn -> ../stow/wordnet-1.7/bin/wn wnb -> ../stow/wordnet-1.7/bin/wnb