[lsb-discuss] Installation directories
imurdock at imurdock.com
Sat Dec 16 14:01:51 PST 2006
On 12/16/06, Wichmann, Mats D <mats.d.wichmann at intel.com> wrote:
> > - 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
> >/usr/local? /opt?
> 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.
I'd encourage ISVs to always install to /opt, whether the package is
being distributed stand-alone or as part of the distro, for
consistency's sake. I'd say the /usr vs. /opt case should be who builds
the package (distro vs. ISV) rather than who distributes it.
> >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.
Hrm, we really need to provide *some* sort of guidance here.. Is this
where we should point to xdg-utils (on the assumption that the main goal
here is to make the software findable by the user, so a menu entry or
desktop icon would suffice)?
"Don't look back--something might be gaining on you." --Satchel Paige
More information about the lsb-discuss