Re: [Fwd: Re: [Dlc-discuss] [Fwd: Linux fragmentation and desktop standards]]

On Friday 11 April 2003 7:44 am, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> > My theory:
> >
> > /usr/qt-3.1/bin/qtconfig
> >
> > /usr/local/qt-3.1/bin/qtconfig
>
> or just /usr/bin/qtconfig

Going strictly by the FHS, my interpretation is that if you want to organise 
by package, you put it in /opt. if you don't, you put it in /usr or 
/usr/local

so the choice would be:

/opt/qt-3.1/bin/qtconfig
/usr/bin/qtconfig
/usr/local/bin/qtconfig

My view has always been that you should put all central parts of a linux 
system (and i'd take this in your average linux distribution as all the stuff 
you need to have a usable console based system) in /usr and everything else 
in /opt; so kde, gnome, qt, mozilla, etc etc would all have their own 
directories in /opt.

In a distribution which is based around kde, for example lindows or ark, it 
would probably be more logical to put all the essential parts of kde in /usr 
too, and anything 'extra' which the user installs should go in /opt. To 
people coming from Windows systems, this would be a lot like the distinction 
between c:\windows and c:\program files. It's also a fairly logical way to 
structure a system.

One problem here though, is that it seems to me to be very difficult to build 
KDE programs so that they work in a seperate hierarchy to KDE itself, i.e. if 
you install KDE in /usr, it seems to be necessary to install KDE programs in 
/usr too. This, IMO, is a design fault of KDE.

-- 
dan

"Were i susceptible to having my mind changed, it would have changed my mind" 
- Matthew Parris

Kde-cafe mailing list - [email protected]
http://ofb.biz/lists/listinfo.cgi/kde-cafe

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this mailinglist are the personal
opinions of the author and do not represent KDE or the author's employer.