Re: PROPOSAL: /opt/<provider>/<package>/

George Kraft wrote:
> 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
> 
> 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.
> 
> http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=4121
> 

What this leads me to believe is that a specified standard that 
"/opt/<provider>" be reserved for the providers. (That way none of the providers 
have to register anything w/ lanana except for their provider names.)  Then the 
structure under that is "suggested" (should vs. shall) be <package>.  But a 
clarification of <package> should be in order.  As others have commented, does 
package mean 1 RPM, or a logical group.  I personally prefer the logical group. 
  At least in our products we have 10's to 100's of RPMS that together make a 
single software "package".

--
Mark Hatle
MontaVista Software, Inc.