From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22975 invoked from network); 19 Sep 2004 20:25:58 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 19 Sep 2004 20:25:58 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1C98G4-0005rg-QX for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 20:26:04 +0000 Received: (qmail 9426 invoked by uid 89); 19 Sep 2004 20:25:55 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 28164 invoked from network); 19 Sep 2004 20:25:55 +0000 Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:26:01 -0700 From: "Joshua J. Berry" To: Dan Armak Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: <20040919202601.GB13163@deneb.condordes.net> References: <200409192306.29528.danarmak@gentoo.org> <20040919200736.GA13163@deneb.condordes.net> <200409192316.44996.danarmak@gentoo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="lEGEL1/lMxI0MVQ2" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200409192316.44996.danarmak@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] any interest in removing /usr/qt and /usr/kde ? X-Archives-Salt: 0a74b044-be07-46ea-a698-2aeec3aebf79 X-Archives-Hash: b6263eb135f578dc24e1bebe5ccae306 --lEGEL1/lMxI0MVQ2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 11:16:44PM +0300, Dan Armak wrote: > On Sunday 19 September 2004 23:07, Joshua J. Berry wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 11:06:29PM +0300, Dan Armak wrote: > > > /usr/qt,kde was my decision at the time. I didn't see any obvious bet= ter > > > FHS-mandated place to put them in. If there's a better place, I'd at > > > least like to hear about it. > > > > Why /usr instead of /opt? > Quoting FHS 2.3 (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html): > "Purpose: /opt is reserved for the installation of add-on application sof= tware=20 > packages." >=20 > To this day I haven't heard a good definitin of "add-on" software in this= =20 > context. I don't see qt/kde as being an addon to anything else. I could easily see KDE/Qt being treated as an "add-on", given that (a) they= 're not necessary for core system functionality (whatever that means), and (b) = they are both heavily-bloated, and you probably don't want to pollute /usr... > Moreover, as Paul points out, in Gentoo we only use /opt so far for=20 > binary-only packages and for packages that don't obey the general unix=20 > directory structur (/bin, /lib, /share, /include...). qt/kde has neither = of=20 > these characteristics. This is true, but I'm wondering if that's maybe a silly move on our part, f= or just this reason. > The FHS says about /usr: "Large software packages must not use a direct= =20 > subdirectory under the /usr hierarchy." I agree this rules out what we're= =20 > doing. The problem is, noone ever proposed a better (more FHS-compliant)= =20 > solution. I really do think this is what /opt was intended for. "Add-on" sounds to me like it's one of those purposefully open-ended words that you can interpret however you like. Actually, the whole section on /opt in the FHS reads tha= t way =2E.. --=20 Joshua J. Berry "I haven't lost my mind -- it's backed up on tape somewhere." -- /usr/games/fortune --lEGEL1/lMxI0MVQ2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBTetZaIxeYlQMsxsRApElAJ9tjgYObVx7Sro1QXamVb5nUCNqVgCePd8f wY/qgtJ0K4VUM1fZaCvZR2A= =VFUu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --lEGEL1/lMxI0MVQ2--