Re: RedHat, Fedora future?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 20:42, Robin Laing wrote:
> [quote]
> /usr/lib : Libraries for programming and packages
> Purpose
> 
> /usr/lib includes object files, libraries, and internal binaries that 
> are not intended to be executed directly by users or shell scripts.
> Applications may use a single subdirectory under /usr/lib. If an 
> application uses a subdirectory, all architecture-dependent data 
> exclusively used by the application must be placed within that 
> subdirectory.
> [/quote]

Which is exactly what Fedora Core does.  Executable files meant for the
internal use of a package are placed in /usr/lib or /usr/lib(qual) often
using the package name.

For example, I have various things in /usr/lib/(package) for a package I
maintain.  There are libraries, perl modules, and such in there.  All
are executable code and only for use by one of various front-ends to the
package.  They generate MB or even GB of data that only the front-end
program understands.

Similarly, the /usr/bin/mozilla script executes the binary
/usr/lib/mozilla-(version)/mozilla-bin.  The use of mozilla-bin is so
incomprehensible as to be useless to most humans.  Thus there's a
friendly script called /usr/bin/mozilla to make it apparently trivial to
run Mozilla. 

> [quote]
> /opt : Add-on application software packages
> Purpose
> 
> /opt is reserved for the installation of add-on application software 
> packages.
> 
> A package to be installed in /opt must locate its static files in a 
> separate /opt/<package> or /opt/<provider> directory tree, where 
> <package> is a name that describes the software package and <provider> 
> is the provider's LANANA registered name.
> [/quote]

But you omit the most important quote of all, "Distributions may install
software in /opt, but must not modify or delete software installed by
the local system administrator without the assent of the local system
administrator."

OK, FHS says distributions _may_ install software to /opt.  (May seems
to imply they don't have to.  For example, Debian doesn't and many hail
it as the holy grail of perfection.)  And _must not_ modify files
maintained outside of an automated package management system.

Fedora's RPM (and Debian) prefers to install software to /usr (which RPM
explicitly supports sharing via network per FHS) but can install
packages to /opt without destroying existing files (suffixes .rpmnew to
conflicting files).  In fact, you may note that you can ask RPM to
install any package anywhere you choose including to /opt/packagename
(if the package doesn't have paths hard-coded but most do).

BTW, you're quoting from FHS 2.3 which was released last week.  With
regard to /opt FHS 2.3 is notably different from the FHS 2.2 spec which
Fedora Core currently follows.

> What about shared directories and links between different versions of 
> Linux.  This could be an issue if different distros put configuration 
> files in different directories.  An example here is Open Office again. 
>   In the users directory is .openoffice that has a link to 
> /usr/lib/openoffice/program/soffice

Seems like OpenOffice is broken to me.

Let's say I want to install OpenOffice to /opt.  I go to their website
and download the installer.  I run the installer on all my systems. 
Hey, I can install to /opt/openoffice.  How convenient.  Now my /home
shared between 60 competing distros works right.  Yay.

> Now if I want to share this /home partition between different distro's 
> of Linux, the link could point to a non-existent file as OpenOffice 
> will be installed in /opt/openoffice or /usr/local.  Now how do I fix 
> this problem easily?

OpenOffice arguably doesn't belong in /usr/local (unless maybe you built
it from source).

> I do admit that Fedora is following the standard that states an 
> application can be fully put in a subdirectory of /usr/lib but as I 
> said earlier, if you download the binary from Mozilla and install it, 
> then it will install in the /usr/local/mozilla directory.  Same with 
> OpenOffice or most other applications that I have installed without 
> using RPM's.

Mozilla doesn't belong in /usr/local/mozilla at all (unless maybe you
built it from source).  Who's violating FHS here?

The key there is this, "...applications that I have installed without
using RPM's."  If the app installs itself then it belongs in
/opt/(something) but if you manually install it (e.g. from source or "cp
myprog /usr/local/bin") then it belongs in /usr/local.  If the system
(i.e. RPM) installs the package then it belongs in /usr, it must not be
installed under /usr/local, and may be installed to /opt/(something)
under the proper circumstances.


The problem, IMHO, is that many software developers, who don't produce
entire operating systems, greatly underestimate the impact of slap-dash
installation methods and ill-conceived file locations.  Its not really
so much that Fedora, Debian or whatever isn't following FHS but instead
its that many high-profile software developers are not following
anything remotely like FHS.  When Fedora (or Debian) provides a
FHS-compliant version of some package which conflicts with the original
author's package then Fedora gets the blame.

-- 
 David Norris
  http://www.webaugur.com/dave/
  ICQ - 412039

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux