packaging suggestions.

[Michael J Knox]

Stephen J. Smoogen said:
> On 2/14/06, seth vidal <skvidal at linux.duke.edu> wrote:
>> > Looking at this old patched version. I had to make some changes to Bro
>> > that I sent upstream, and could not use the %configure but had to add
>> > some entries to make it do what it should and not what it wanted.
>> >
>> > If the /svr/bro tree is allowed in extras.. that would clean up most
>> > of the problems. Bro is a server/service. If it isnt.. expect to do a
>> > bunch of cleanup. I think that most of my patch doesnt work with the
>> > later versions due to offsets and such.
>> >
>>
>
> Talked to Seth on IRC, and /srv is also not the correct place for it
> either from the FHS.. The bro package is going to need a lot of little
> patches to match the FHS I think.
>
>

Could /opt/bro be a possability?

I have started the trek of patching up bro to be a little more FHS
friendly, but no idea as to when I will be finished.

Michael.