relocatable packages ?

[David Kewley]

I've made relocatable rpms for e.g. Matlab.  My idea is that I want it 
in /opt but my colleague across campus might want it in /usr/local/.  
No way does it belong in /usr.

Is there something wrong with using relocations in such a case?

David


On Monday 20 June 2005 15:27, Chip Turner wrote:
> Relocations are so utterly evil that the support in rpm itself should
> be removed :)
>
> Chip
>
> On 6/20/05, seth vidal <skvidal at phy.duke.edu> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 17:20 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > > >>>>> "sv" == seth vidal <skvidal at phy.duke.edu> writes:
> > >
> > > sv> If they are not already then relocatable packages should be
> > > sv> discouraged/condemned in fedora extras.
> > >
> > > Is there any reason why they might be needed?  The only times
> > > I've ever tried to use relocations was when the packager did
> > > something boneheaded like try to put things under /home (autofs
> > > point for me) or /usr/local (rsync'ed from central server for
> > > me).  And in those cases I found it simpler to rebuild from
> > > source or to create my own RPM that unpacks the original binary
> > > RPM and puts the files in the right place.
> >
> > agreed - death to relocations!!
> > -sv