Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Tracker
From: Juan Linietsky (coding_AT_reduz.com.ar)
Date: Sat Nov 29 2003 - 22:10:27 EET
On Friday 28 November 2003 16:01, Florian Schmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 12:39:31 -0600
>
> Billy Biggs <vektor_AT_dumbterm.net> wrote:
> > It's really awkward that autoconf-based tools default to /usr/local
> > since many users of my applications often use it and end up with
> > non-FHS compliant silly directories like /usr/local/etc and
> > /usr/local/var which should never exist. Putting everything under
> > $PREFIX is really a compromise by the autoconf folks, and using
> > /usr/local seems to be another compromise partly to help separate GNU
> > stuff from native stuff(think installing bash on a Solaris machine).
>
> I acyually like it this way. In debian, at least, no package will ever
> install anything to /usr/local, so installing stuff to /usr/local will
> at least garantee to not confuse the package management system.
>
but confuse the user:
Common situation.
new cool amazing program/version is out, we download it, no packages yet so we
compile
and it goes to /usr/local.
Some months later someone packaged it and the user says "good i can apt-get
it"
and the program installs in /usr, while the old one is in /usr/local.
Result: new program doesnt work, as /usr/local has priority, and the user is
confused. He probably just removed the sources as they were taking space
and cant -or doesnt know- about make uninstall.
as paul says, opt/ is a fine solution for this, as everything just symlinks,
but it's sad that it never took off.
Cheers
Juan Linietsky
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Nov 28 2003 - 22:07:18 EET