[lsb-discuss] Installation directories
Wichmann, Mats D
mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Sat Dec 16 06:44:50 PST 2006
>1) The RealPlayer is used as both a standalone application and as a
>library for other player apps using it's core and adding their own UI
>(see Banshee, Totem, etc.) When the user upgrades their RealPlayer,
>does the LSB specify how we should avoid breaking the apps that rely
>on the previously installed version? Should we be naming each install
>with version numbers like a library? ex:
We don't have a published recommentation for this.
>2) The FHS seems to require different installation directories based
>on two things: (binary installer vs. rpm or deb package), and
>(user-installed vs. distro-included). This is a tangled mess for us.
> - We release both a binary installer and a package on our website
>where users can download and install the product themselves. I'm
>guessing the binary goes into /opt/real/RealPlayer, but the package
>goes to /usr/local/real/RealPlayer?
Three places: distro-provided (/usr), user/sysadmin (/usr/local),
and ISV (/opt). If it's in a package you provide, whether that
package is package-manager style (rpm/deb) or some other kind
of bundle (executable, unpacking shell script, whatever), it should
go in /opt, in a subdirectory that's reserved to you. /usr/local
is for the kind of thing where the "system administrator", for want
of a better term, pulls down a tarball, builds and installs it.
> - We also build packages specifically for our distros, but while
>some of them include the RealPlayer in their base installation,
>others just put the packages on their software repositories. Would
>the packages be installed into /usr/real/RealPlayer in both cases? Or
Not /usr/local. I'd say /usr is the answer here, if the package
is obtained from the distro's repository, whether that's called
"base" or "extras" or whatever. But if it's exactly the same
package as someone would get by going to your website, then
it could probably be set up for /opt as well. A bit of a
grey area when you're "distro-provided" and "ISV" at the same time.
>3) Are we allowed to create links from the binary in any of these
>directories back to the standard path directories? It seemed that
>Section 4 of the lsb book said no.
No. The concept is to stay completely out of the "distro namespace",
and there's not a lot of difference between installing a binary
into /usr/bin and putting a symlink there.
the FHS has its own list, freestandards-fhs-discuss at sourceforge.net.
More information about the lsb-discuss