On Wed, Jan 12, 2022, at 4:05 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 02:53:52PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: >> Should /usr be independently portable? And is that with a version >> matched /opt, or can there be mix and match revisions of /usr and >> /opt? > > We have three similar locations: /usr (system vendor tree), > /usr/local (admin non-packages installations), /opt (external vendor tree). > In other words, both /usr and /opt are for packages, but from different > sources. As an admin, you'd want to treat both package types the same, > and e.g. roll them back together. So having a separate tree for /opt > doesn't make much sense. > > [At some point in the future] /opt should be renamed to /usr/opt and > symlinked for backwards compat. Unfortunately, real world RPMs that install into /opt also have e.g. log files in /opt/somesoftware/log, not /var/log/somesoftware. So it can't be underneath the read-only /usr mount. This is why rpm-ostree just straight up rejects RPMs that install into /opt. https://github.com/coreos/rpm-ostree/issues/233 I think I agree with Chris that really what we want is a separate rpmdb for this. That would mean these packages don't participate in offline transactional updates, can't be rolled back etc. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
