[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: relocatable packages ?

>>>>> "DK" == David Kewley <kewley gps caltech edu> writes:

DK> Where does your Mathematica rpm come from?

I made it.  I don't really have any unpackaged software on my systems
except for a couple of standalone binaries stuck in /usr/local/bin and
rsync'ed to each machine.  One day I should take the time to package
them up as well.

DK> /opt/matlab, on the other hand, seems fine to me the point of /opt
DK> is to shrug and take whatever each vendor package throws at you.

Sorry, I just don't see the point, and I'm certainly not going to go
adding another partition for /opt, resizing / or (even worse) just
making /opt a link into /usr/opt or something equally bad.  On my
systems, /usr is where user-accessible RPM-packaged software goes
unless its necessary for booting.

But hey, I'm not asking anyone to do it this way, and I never have.  I
just indicated the way I did things.  It just seems to me to be far
more consistent to do it the way I do than to say that packages belong
elsewhere because they have different licenses or are larger than some
arbitrary measure.  Other opinions on the matter will, of course,

Anyway, wasn't this about relocatable packages?  I did update the wiki
page to indicate that they're strongly discouraged.

And if we want to make this discussion on-topic by talking about
whether it would be possible to put together a set of nosrc.rpms for
popular commercial packages somewhere under the Fedora umbrella then
I'd be happy to join in.

 - J<

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]