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@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@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@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
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
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 16:27, Timothy Pearson kb9vqf@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 ?
Eh, I guess we could break a few rules and try doing stuff in /usr/trinity. ;)
On Friday 25 November 2011 23:31:25 Robert Xu wrote: [...]
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. ;)
I think is not FHS conforming. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard
Timothy Pearson 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 ?
Reading the proposal (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove), this would at least allow everything to work as intended.
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@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@lists.pearsoncomputing.net For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-devel-help@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
On Sun, 27 Nov 2011 23:03:13 +0000 Tiago Marques tiagomnm@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.
2011/11/25 Robert Xu robxu9@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?
2011/11/25 Robert Xu robxu9@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 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
2011/11/25 Timothy Pearson kb9vqf@pearsoncomputing.net
2011/11/25 Robert Xu robxu9@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 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.
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. :)
On 25 November 2011 18:05, Andrea Cascio andrea@nucleus.it wrote:
2011/11/25 Timothy Pearson kb9vqf@pearsoncomputing.net
2011/11/25 Robert Xu robxu9@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
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.
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. :)
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
-
Andrea Cascio -
Calvin Morrison -
E. Liddell -
Julius Schwartzenberg -
Robert Xu -
Serghei Amelian -
Tiago Marques -
Timothy Pearson