RE: PROPOSAL: /opt/<provider>/<package>/]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: George Kraft [mailto:[email protected]]
> 
> The FHS v2.2 section 3.12 reads, add-on application software packages go
> in /opt/<package>/.  Where <package> would be a "lsb-application_name"
> or "lsb-provider-application_name" LANANA registered name resulting is
> something like "/opt/lsb-bricks/" or "/opt/lsb-acme-bricks/" .
> 
> http://www.pathname.com/fhs/2.2/fhs-3.12.html
> 
>
http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/refspecs/LSB_1.3.0/gLSB/gLSB/pkgnameconv.html

Since nothing below /opt/<package> has been defined, it is verry easy to
shoehorn your own stuff down there.

> 
> The notion of /opt/<provider>/<package>/ (e.g., /opt/acme/lsb-bricks/)
> was suggested in a comment to the Linux Journal, November 2000, issue 79
> article entitled "Where to Install My Products on Linux?".  In addition,
> it appears this nomenclature was assumed by some of the LSB workgroup
> members.

It can be a good idea to add an other level to group packages. However, it
should not be restricted to the provider, it can also be bundle or any other
group. For example /opt/kde4/kwrite/...

I think for the standard, it should be enough to define the next 2 things
(which are already defined):
packages should default to install somewhere in /opt/package, adding
directory levels as necessary.
A package should create its own subtree using .../bin, .../usr, .../lib,
.../man as necessary. Mostly for situations where relocation is to /usr,
such that the proper subdirectories are used by default

Then, a supplier can use /opt/package/bin and such for single packages, it
can use /opt/provider/bundle/variant/subset/version/package/bin and such if
it wants to do so.

On top of it all, its just the default location. If a package installer
wants to apply to the standard, it should be relocatable. It might even be
possible to have packages without default location, using the default
location of the package-installer-tool or even without any default.

Come to think of it, the ultimate place for a package to be installed is in
the /usr tree. Down there, there is no sublevel like /usr/package, all goes
in /usr... But that's an other view.

> 
> http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=4121
> 
> It is proposed that in addition to the /opt/<package>/ specified by the
> FHS and LSB, that we officially add /opt/<provider>/<package>/.  This
> would allow possible large collection of applications by certain
> providers to be organized under their reserved /opt/ subdirectory.
> 
> Suggested actions.
> 
> 1) Adoption by the FHS workgroup and inclusion in FHS v2.3

What needs to be adapted? I think for the lawyers the text might need some
aditions. For the engineers, a package can default to anywhere below
/opt/...

> 2) Adoption by the LSB workgroup and inclusion in the LSB v1.3 errata,
>    and LSB v1.9.
> 3) Adoption by the LANANA workgroup and extension of the registered
>    provider name to include /opt/ subdirectories.

I think LANANA can be a platform to keep track of the names in the /opt
directory. Owners of the /opt/LANANA_aproved_name can define all below
/opt/LANANA_aproved_name/. Same as with domainnames.


CBee