25 Nov
2011
25 Nov
'11
9:10 p.m.
If the system administrators do this change, how will we accommodate
Trinity to it?
Fedora is doing it; openSUSE is having an argument about if this is good or not.
Gentoo had a discussion on this, I think.
Should this be treated like a simple "let's move to /usr/local" or has
the renaming allowed us to install side by side with KDE4 without the
use of /opt?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Greg KH <gregkh(a)suse.de>
Date: Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 22:51
Subject: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.2, move all binaries under /usr
To: opensuse-factory(a)opensuse.org
Hi all,
As a proposal for 12.2, I would like to implement the move of all
binaries to /usr/ like is being done at the moment in Fedora.
Here's the details as to why this is a good thing to do, and what is
involved in it:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
The first packages implementing this have already started to land in
Fedora's version of Factory.
Before you get worried, there will be symlinks back to /bin and /sbin
for those scripts expecting things to be in those locations.
We can use the Fedora patches for almost all of this, they are all
published at:
http://harald.fedorapeople.org/downloads/usrmove/
and a number of upstream projects are already moving their releases over
to this as well, which will make things easier.
If there are no major objections, I'll start working on Base:system in
December.
thanks,
greg k-h
p.s. Please, before you respond, read the link above and all of the
discussion about it and don't repeat the same questions that the link
already answers.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org
--
later daze. :: Robert Xu :: rxu.lincomlinux.org :: protocol.by/rxu
25 Nov
25 Nov
9:27 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Fwd: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.2, move all binaries under /usr
If the system administrators do this change, how will
we accommodate
Trinity to it?
Fedora is doing it; openSUSE is having an argument about if this is good
or not.
Gentoo had a discussion on this, I think.
Should this be treated like a simple "let's move to /usr/local" or has
the renaming allowed us to install side by side with KDE4 without the
use of /opt?
We have not renamed everything--we would still conflict with KDE4 due to
applications such as konsole and kwrite.
Not knowing too much about the standard directories on RPM systems, would
it be possible to install to /usr/trinity ?
Tim
9:31 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Fwd: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.2, move all binaries under /usr
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 16:27, Timothy Pearson
<kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net> wrote:
Eh, I guess we could break a few rules and try doing stuff in /usr/trinity. ;)
--
later daze. :: Robert Xu :: rxu.lincomlinux.org :: protocol.by/rxu
If the system
administrators do this change, how will we accommodate
Trinity to it?
Fedora is doing it; openSUSE is having an argument about if this is good
or not.
Gentoo had a discussion on this, I think.
Should this be treated like a simple "let's move to /usr/local" or has
the renaming allowed us to install side by side with KDE4 without the
use of /opt?
We have not renamed everything--we would still conflict with KDE4 due to
applications such as konsole and kwrite.
Not knowing too much about the standard directories on RPM systems, would
it be possible to install to /usr/trinity ?
9:35 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Fwd: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.2, move all binaries under /usr
On Friday 25 November 2011 23:31:25 Robert Xu wrote:
[...]
I think is not FHS conforming.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard
--
Serghei
Not knowing
too much about the standard directories on RPM systems, would
it be possible to install to /usr/trinity ?
Eh, I guess we could break a few rules and try doing stuff in /usr/trinity.
;) 
9:40 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Fwd: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.2, move all binaries under /usr
Timothy Pearson wrote:
Reading the proposal (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove),
this would at least allow everything to work as intended.
If the system
administrators do this change, how will we accommodate
Trinity to it?
Fedora is doing it; openSUSE is having an argument about if this is good
or not.
Gentoo had a discussion on this, I think.
Should this be treated like a simple "let's move to /usr/local" or has
the renaming allowed us to install side by side with KDE4 without the
use of /opt?
We have not renamed everything--we would still conflict with KDE4 due to
applications such as konsole and kwrite.
Not knowing too much about the standard directories on RPM systems, would
it be possible to install to /usr/trinity ? 
27 Nov
27 Nov
11:03 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Fwd: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.2, move all binaries under /usr
Once upon a time, Gentoo users could have multiple versions of KDE
installed without any compatibility problems by using the following prefix
system:
- */usr/kde* as the main dir
- /usr/kde/3.5 as the dir for the 3.5 install
- /usr/kde/3.4 as the dir for the 3.4 install
Now, I don't know how it handled the paths in the environment but
everything was transparent and worked great. One would just select which
version to boot on KDM and everything would work fine. I think the session
script was used to set up the proper paths but I'm not sure.
Perhaps it is worth looking into a similar scheme for trinity, where *
/usr/trinity* could be used as the main folder - as was mentioned on a
previous e-mail by Robert.
Best regards,
Tiago
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Timothy Pearson <
kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net> wrote:
If the system
administrators do this change, how will we accommodate
Trinity to it?
Fedora is doing it; openSUSE is having an argument about if this is good
or not.
Gentoo had a discussion on this, I think.
Should this be treated like a simple "let's move to /usr/local" or has
the renaming allowed us to install side by side with KDE4 without the
use of /opt?
We have not renamed everything--we would still conflict with KDE4 due to
applications such as konsole and kwrite.
Not knowing too much about the standard directories on RPM systems, would
it be possible to install to /usr/trinity ?
Tim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
trinity-devel-unsubscribe(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
For additional commands, e-mail:
trinity-devel-help(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Read list messsages on the Web archive:
http://trinity-devel.pearsoncomputing.net/
Please remember not to top-post:
http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
28 Nov
28 Nov
12:57 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Fwd: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.2, move all binaries under /usr
On Sun, 27 Nov 2011 23:03:13 +0000
Tiago Marques <tiagomnm(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Once upon a time, Gentoo users could have multiple
versions of KDE
installed without any compatibility problems by using the following prefix
system:
- */usr/kde* as the main dir
- /usr/kde/3.5 as the dir for the 3.5 install
- /usr/kde/3.4 as the dir for the 3.4 install
Now, I don't know how it handled the paths in the environment but
everything was transparent and worked great. One would just select which
version to boot on KDM and everything would work fine. I think the session
script was used to set up the proper paths but I'm not sure.
Some path setting occurs in startkde under Gentoo:
# Gentoo: setup environment, filter other slotted KDE installs from PATH
_KDEDIR=/usr/kde/3.5
export PATH=${_KDEDIR}/bin:$(echo ${PATH} | sed
's/$/:/g;s#/usr/kde/[^/]*/s\?bin/\?:##g;s/:$//g')
export ROOTPATH=${_KDEDIR}/sbin:${_KDEDIR}/bin:$(echo ${PATH} | sed
's/$/:/g;s#/usr/kde/[^/]*/s\?bin/\?:##g;s/:$//g')
export LDPATH=/usr/kde/3.5/lib:/usr/kde/3.5/lib64:/usr/kde/3.5/lib32:${LDPATH}
export XDG_DATA_DIRS=${_KDEDIR}/share:$(echo ${XDG_DATA_DIRS} | sed
's/$/:/g;s#/usr/kde/[^/]*/share/\?:##g;s/:$//g')
Presumably, the seds are the filter that handle other versions of KDE.
25 Nov
25 Nov
10:31 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Fwd: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.2, move all binaries under /usr
2011/11/25 Robert Xu <robxu9(a)gmail.com>
If the system administrators do this change, how will
we accommodate
Trinity to it?
Fedora is doing it; openSUSE is having an argument about if this is good
or not.
Gentoo had a discussion on this, I think.
Should this be treated like a simple "let's move to /usr/local" or has
the renaming allowed us to install side by side with KDE4 without the
use of /opt?
I have read this proposal some time ago, and even if don't entirely agree
with it because I don't consider it painless as everybody seems to believe,
I think it can also lead to interesting possibilities.
It seems that /opt is not even considered in the plan. To me /opt doesn't
stink :) I think it's a reasonable short term solution, as long as $PATH
keeps working the traditional way (as it should for a long time).
Of course a complete rename of every application, binary, lib, man and so
on, to avoid any name collision with KDE, even installing in the same
paths, is the true long term solution. But I really don't know if this is
already the case. Timothy?
10:40 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Fwd: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.2, move all binaries under /usr
2011/11/25 Robert Xu <robxu9(a)gmail.com>
Renaming konsole and other applications will be very difficult, as the TDE
userbase is quite familiar with the existing names. If I were to start
renaming these applications I suspect I would have a mass migration to
LXDE or another desktop entirely, as the learning curves will tilt in
favor of a more mainstream desktop.
Tim
If the system administrators do this change, how
will we accommodate
Trinity to it?
Fedora is doing it; openSUSE is having an argument about if this is good
or not.
Gentoo had a discussion on this, I think.
Should this be treated like a simple "let's move to /usr/local" or has
the renaming allowed us to install side by side with KDE4 without the
use of /opt?
I have read this proposal some time ago, and even if don't entirely agree
with it because I don't consider it painless as everybody seems to
believe,
I think it can also lead to interesting possibilities.
It seems that /opt is not even considered in the plan. To me /opt doesn't
stink :) I think it's a reasonable short term solution, as long as $PATH
keeps working the traditional way (as it should for a long time).
Of course a complete rename of every application, binary, lib, man and so
on, to avoid any name collision with KDE, even installing in the same
paths, is the true long term solution. But I really don't know if this is
already the case. Timothy?
11:05 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Fwd: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.2, move all binaries under /usr
2011/11/25 Timothy Pearson <kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net>
True. Then, sooner or later I think we should resolve name collisions by keeping
the traditional names in desktop-files, application names and documentation
while altering the names of packages, dirs, libs, binaries and so on.
Maybe with a standard suffix (-trinity or -tde?)
As an example we will have the package konsole-tde installing docs in
/usr/share/.../konsole-tde/ and the binary in /usr/bin/konsole-tde but
still showing
itself as just "Konsole" to the user (or Konsole [TDE]?)
It's somehow... ugly, and it surely needs a lot of work, but I can't
think about a better
long-term solution for now.
In the meanwhile, of course, /opt is our friend, so we have a lot of
time to do more
important work and think about a better idea. :)
2011/11/25 Robert Xu <robxu9(a)gmail.com>
Renaming konsole and other applications will be very difficult, as the TDE
userbase is quite familiar with the existing names. If I were to start
renaming these applications I suspect I would have a mass migration to
LXDE or another desktop entirely, as the learning curves will tilt in
favor of a more mainstream desktop. If the system administrators do this change, how
will we accommodate
Trinity to it?
Fedora is doing it; openSUSE is having an argument about if this is good
or not.
Gentoo had a discussion on this, I think.
Should this be treated like a simple "let's move to /usr/local" or has
the renaming allowed us to install side by side with KDE4 without the
use of /opt?
I have read this proposal some time ago, and even if don't entirely agree
with it because I don't consider it painless as everybody seems to
believe,
I think it can also lead to interesting possibilities.
It seems that /opt is not even considered in the plan. To me /opt doesn't
stink :) I think it's a reasonable short term solution, as long as $PATH
keeps working the traditional way (as it should for a long time).
Of course a complete rename of every application, binary, lib, man and so
on, to avoid any name collision with KDE, even installing in the same
paths, is the true long term solution. But I really don't know if this is
already the case. Timothy?
26 Nov
26 Nov
12:54 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Fwd: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.2, move all binaries under /usr
On 25 November 2011 18:05, Andrea Cascio <andrea(a)nucleus.it> wrote:
2011/11/25 Timothy Pearson
<kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net>
TDE
This usr move seem like crap to me. This is quite controversial and there
ARE reasons that they were historically placed. I don't see a need to
complicate things further. Ubuntu and Fedora both seem to have fun doing
their own thing without respecting standards or thinking about the greater
FOSS ecosystem. I wish that they would just leave and let be.
Calvin
> 2011/11/25 Robert Xu <robxu9(a)gmail.com>
>
>> If the system administrators do this change, how will we accommodate
>> Trinity to it?
>> Fedora is doing it; openSUSE is having an argument about if this is
good
>> or not.
>> Gentoo had a discussion on this, I think.
>>
>> Should this be treated like a simple "let's move to /usr/local" or
has
>> the renaming allowed us to install side by side with KDE4 without the
>> use of /opt?
>
>
> I have read this proposal some time ago, and even if don't entirely
agree
> with it because I don't consider it
painless as everybody seems to
> believe,
> I think it can also lead to interesting possibilities.
> It seems that /opt is not even considered in the plan. To me /opt
doesn't
> stink :) I think it's a reasonable short
term solution, as long as
$PATH
> keeps working the traditional way (as it
should for a long time).
> Of course a complete rename of every application, binary, lib, man and
so
> on, to avoid any name collision with KDE,
even installing in the same
> paths, is the true long term solution. But I really don't know if this
is
already
the case. Timothy?
Renaming konsole and other applications will be very difficult, as the userbase is quite familiar with the existing
names. If I were to start
renaming these applications I suspect I would have a mass migration to
LXDE or another desktop entirely, as the learning curves will tilt in
favor of a more mainstream desktop.
True. Then, sooner or later I think we should resolve name collisions by
keeping
the traditional names in desktop-files, application names and
documentation
while altering the names of packages, dirs, libs, binaries and so on.
Maybe with a standard suffix (-trinity or -tde?)
As an example we will have the package konsole-tde installing docs in
/usr/share/.../konsole-tde/ and the binary in /usr/bin/konsole-tde but
still showing
itself as just "Konsole" to the user (or Konsole [TDE]?)
It's somehow... ugly, and it surely needs a lot of work, but I can't
think about a better
long-term solution for now.
In the meanwhile, of course, /opt is our friend, so we have a lot of
time to do more
important work and think about a better idea. :)
4539
days inactive
4542
days old
10 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Andrea Cascio -
Calvin Morrison -
E. Liddell -
Julius Schwartzenberg -
Robert Xu -
Serghei Amelian -
Tiago Marques -
Timothy Pearson