| 1 |
On Tuesday 02 July 2002 01:41 pm, Dan Armak wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> And since we've come to the conclusion we can't put it in /opt, |
| 4 |
> /usr/kde/2,3 (or equivalent) is the only option left. The fhs doesn't |
| 5 |
> provide for having more than one version of a package installed at a time |
| 6 |
> but we have to do it with qt2/3 and kdelibs2/3 (and gnome 1.4/2). I prefer |
| 7 |
> that option over 100% FHS compliance. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
I find the use of a .../kde/2 and .../kde/3 directory to be very useful, and |
| 10 |
your reasoning for doing so certainly seems sound to myself (speaking as a |
| 11 |
more or less 'outside' observer). |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
However, I'm a little confused why (or how) it was decided that /opt would be |
| 14 |
an inappropriate place to have put this. In other words, why is /usr/kde/3 |
| 15 |
and /usr/kde/2 better than /opt/kde/3 and /opt/kde/2? I'm not criticizing (I |
| 16 |
have no real opinion on FHS compliance, or lack thereof, at all), I'm just |
| 17 |
wondering what the rationale is for not wanting to put things like this in |
| 18 |
/opt. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Jean. |
Archives