On 11/05/2013 05:30 AM, Björn Persson wrote:
Jon Ciesla wrote:
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Marcela Mašláňová
<mmaslano@xxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
We need the installation inside the /opt directory because some
users are using it exactly as Bill mentioned.
Isn't that exactly why we musn't touch anything inside /opt?
It seems reasonable to me that the Fedora project could be both an OS
provider and an add-on provider. In its add-on provider role Fedora
could register a provider name "fedora" with LANANA, and package SCLs
for installation under /opt/fedora/<scl_name>. (I see that "rh",
"rhat", "centos" and "suse" are already registered as provider names.)
"The directories /opt/bin, /opt/doc, /opt/include, /opt/info, /opt/lib,
and /opt/man are reserved for local system administrator use."
That seems pretty clear that those are the only ones specifically
reserved for the local system administrator.
"Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not modify or
delete software installed by the local system administrator without the
assent of the local system administrator."
Which implies the only requirement is that the SCL installer would have
to ask before replacing a package (assuming /opt/<package>). The LANANA
registration and subsequent package hierarchy would be simplest, safest,
and most logical, imho.
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
