[scl.org] Removing 'scls' from %{_sysconfdir} and %{_localstatedir}?

Honza Horak hhorak at redhat.com
Thu Feb 26 12:26:10 UTC 2015

On 02/26/2015 01:18 PM, Lubos Kardos wrote:
> Have a look at bug #1066665 especially at comment 8.

Ok, that's what I supposed, but see that the comment speaks about 
/opt/fedora/scls as well, which is not in scl-utils. So, what we have 
now is some half-way solution.

Another possibility is to add 'scls' to /opt/rh/<sclname> in case 
%nfsmountable is defined.


> Lubos
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Honza Horak" <hhorak at redhat.com>
>> To: sclorg at redhat.com, "Lubos Kardos" <lkardos at redhat.com>
>> Cc: "Lukas Zachar" <lzachar at redhat.com>, "Petr Splichal" <psplicha at redhat.com>, "Jan Zelený" <jzeleny at redhat.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 1:02:36 PM
>> Subject: Removing 'scls' from %{_sysconfdir} and %{_localstatedir}?
>> Latest scl-utils define the following paths if %{nfsmountable} macro is
>> defined:
>>     %{_sysconfdir}    expands to /etc/opt/<vendor>/scls/<sclname>
>>     %{_localstatedir} expands to /var/opt/<vendor>/scls/<sclname>
>> (see the 'scls' part) but the rest files don't use 'scls', e.g.:
>>     %{_bindir}        expands to /opt/<vendor>/<sclname>
>> (no 'scls' in the path).
>> I've heard a serious critic of this *inconsistency* today from our QE --
>> using 'scls' under /etc/opt and /var/opt, but not in /opt. And I admit I
>> agree with them, even though I haven't paid much attention to that
>> inconsistency before.
>> This 'scls' part probably comes from the Fedora draft [1], but realize
>> that in that draft 'scls' is also used under /opt/<vendor>.
>> I can't find any reasoning for this 'scls' directory, I can only assume
>> it was used to distinguish SCL technology from other possible
>> technologies utilizing /opt in the future.
>> My opinion is we don't need this distinguishing at all.
>> Software Collections are just a delivery mechanism, to place files into
>> a unique structure, separated based on the *collection name*. If we
>> don't need to separate SCLs by any 'scl' keyword on RPM packages names
>> (i.e. we don't call collections with scl-colname, at least not now), we
>> don't need to do it on filesystem level either.
>> On the other hand, if we find out in the future, that this
>> distinguishing is necessary, we'll need to do it not only in the files
>> paths, but also in the RPM names, so the 'scl' would need to be used in
>> the collection name itself.. At any case, 'scls' should be removed from
>> the paths /etc/opt/ and /var/opt/.
>> [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Toshio/SCL_Guidelines_%28draft%29
>> Honza

More information about the SCLorg mailing list