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=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_MISSING, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,RDNS_DYNAMIC autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from yatima.jean.nu (leg-66-247-54-74-CHI.sprinthome.com [66.247.54.74]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D239AABD79 for ; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 17:00:19 -0500 (CDT) Received: from yatima.jean.nu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yatima.jean.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D5945E7B6; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 17:00:16 -0500 (CDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Jean-Michel Smith To: Luke Ravitch , gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Why the FHS can't be followed Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 17:00:15 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.1 References: <20020701173735.5d1093ae.erichey2@attbi.com> <200207021410.00311.jsmith@kcco.com> <20020702200608.GB5646@ogremage.dslxtreme.com> In-Reply-To: <20020702200608.GB5646@ogremage.dslxtreme.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200207021700.15940.jsmith@kcco.com> 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: fdb58adb-72dc-41a0-bd30-78d7c49ba42e X-Archives-Hash: c8a1c6700bbff84d4ef1542840c9444f On Tuesday 02 July 2002 03:06 pm, Luke Ravitch wrote: > My feeling is that nothing in the /usr tree should depend on anything > in /opt. Things in /opt are meant to be self-contained. If we put > Gnome and KDE in /opt, where do we put apps that optionally depend on > them? E.g, XMMS isn't really a gnome app (and so shouldn't be under > /opt/gnome) but can have Gnome dependencies (for the applet). That is a very interesting point I hadn't considered. I think I agree wi= th you as well (not that my personal opinion matters a whole lot in this con= text :) > Though I'm generally a big supporter, I think the FHS might be wrong > on this one. Gnome and KDE should go under /usr/gnome and /usr/kde. > I do agree that adding an immediate subdirectory of /usr is not > something that should be taken lightly. However, Gnome and KDE are > significantly entrenched as part of Gentoo that they might warrant an > X-like exception. This is a problem we're going to keep running into, perhaps more commonly= as large, free(dom) office suites, new desktops like gnustep and enlightenme= nt, etc. mature. Perhaps we should be looking for a more general solution, rather than making exceptions for gnome and KDE. I mean, if we've decided the FHS is wrong on this particular point, why n= ot make the fix more general and all-encompassing? I would prefer to see /usr/X11R6 remain a relatively "pure" X tree (I nev= er liked the way Mandrake dumped a lot of non-core 3rd party X apps into /usr/X11R6/bin, for example), and I do not think /usr/X11R6 offers a gene= ral solution. What about a big database or SAP application that has no GUI, = but is monstrous and demanding of its own tree, yet for whatever reason doesn= 't belong in /opt? I don't have any bright ideas on what the directory should be called, per= se, and I'm sure someone will think of a more clever name than this, but if w= e're going to deviate from the FHS why not make it for just ONE directory, ben= eath which subdirectories for large, free package suites like KDE, Gnome, Enlightenment, etc could reside. Something like: /usr/sw/kde/2 /usr/sw/kde/3 /usr/sw/gnome/1 /usr/sw/gnome/2 /usr/sw/enlightenment/16 /usr/sw/enlightenment/17 and so on. (sw=3Dsoftware, not a very imaginative name. Perhaps the lon= g=20 version is better, e.g. /usr/software/kde/2, etc.) In any event, the deviation from the FHS would be limited to one director= y and more or less isolated from the rest of the filesystem tree. Indeed, give= n that the FHS doesn't consider the possibility of keeping around multiple versions of large software suites like KDE and Gnome (something which *should* be provided for, as that is in keeping with UNIX's tradition of allowing versioned libraries, etc. to coexist nicely), perhaps such a solution could be proposed as an amendment to the FHS. Anyway, just some thoughts from the peanut gallary for your consideration= =2E Jean.