which installation path for your local application (Was Files listed twice question)
 

> > %files
> > /usr/local/myAppTopDir/
>
> Just a question - any reason in particular why you are using /usr/local
> instead of /opt ?
>
> /usr/local is suppose to be for applications compiled from source on the
> machine, /opt is for third party vendor packages (be they rpm or tarball
> or whatever)
>

Before I start, this is my interpretation of what I've read. I'm open to
being convinced otherwise, this is just what I've gathered over time. Okay,
and go:

This isn't really a third party vendor package if its his. In that case
its a local package that he is just packaging it for easy distribution on
his own systems. Packaging the application for easy internal deployment
does not change it from locally installed software to third party software.
I'm not saying /opt is not an acceptable location, but at the same time
/usr/local/ is just as acceptable. Per the FHS:

"The /usr/local hierarchy is for use by the system administrator when
installing software locally. It needs to be safe from being overwritten
when the system software is updated. It may be used for programs and data
that are shareable amongst a group of hosts, but not found in /usr. " [1]

"/opt is reserved for the installation of add-on application software
packages. " [2]

If one was to hold true that anything not provided by the OS belongs in
/opt, then one could argue that all of EPEL should be configured for /opt,
and back in Fedora Extras days, all of Extras should have been in /opt.

When installing into /usr/local/ you do need to make sure that your
application is not writing back to anything in that directory space.

-greg



[1] http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#USRLOCALLOCALHIERARCHY
[2]
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#OPTADDONAPPLICATIONSOFTWAREPACKAGES

_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

which installation path for your local application (Was Files listed twice question)
 

Thank you guys for all your comments, they are being very informative.

Just as background info, this does qualify as a third party vendor
package; the company I work for is exploring different ways in which to
distribute its application and I'm trying out RPM for this reason.

Regards.

Adrián.

Greg_Swift@aotx.uscourts.gov wrote:
>>> %files
>>> /usr/local/myAppTopDir/
>>>
>> Just a question - any reason in particular why you are using /usr/local
>> instead of /opt ?
>>
>> /usr/local is suppose to be for applications compiled from source on the
>> machine, /opt is for third party vendor packages (be they rpm or tarball
>> or whatever)
>>
>>
>
> Before I start, this is my interpretation of what I've read. I'm open to
> being convinced otherwise, this is just what I've gathered over time. Okay,
> and go:
>
> This isn't really a third party vendor package if its his. In that case
> its a local package that he is just packaging it for easy distribution on
> his own systems. Packaging the application for easy internal deployment
> does not change it from locally installed software to third party software.
> I'm not saying /opt is not an acceptable location, but at the same time
> /usr/local/ is just as acceptable. Per the FHS:
>
> "The /usr/local hierarchy is for use by the system administrator when
> installing software locally. It needs to be safe from being overwritten
> when the system software is updated. It may be used for programs and data
> that are shareable amongst a group of hosts, but not found in /usr. " [1]
>
> "/opt is reserved for the installation of add-on application software
> packages. " [2]
>
> If one was to hold true that anything not provided by the OS belongs in
> /opt, then one could argue that all of EPEL should be configured for /opt,
> and back in Fedora Extras days, all of Extras should have been in /opt.
>
> When installing into /usr/local/ you do need to make sure that your
> application is not writing back to anything in that directory space.
>
> -greg
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#USRLOCALLOCALHIERARCHY
> [2]
> http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#OPTADDONAPPLICATIONSOFTWAREPACKAGES
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm-list mailing list
> Rpm-list@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
>

_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

which installation path for your local application (Was Files listed twice question)
 

> Just as background info, this does qualify as a third party vendor
> package; the company I work for is exploring different ways in which to
> distribute its application and I'm trying out RPM for this reason.

okay, so i retract it towards his, but the question still stands for local
packages if anyone would care to give input?

-greg

_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

which installation path for your local application (Was Files listed twice question)
 

Greg_Swift@aotx.uscourts.gov wrote:



If one was to hold true that anything not provided by the OS belongs in
/opt, then one could argue that all of EPEL should be configured for /opt,
and back in Fedora Extras days, all of Extras should have been in /opt.


I don't know specifically about Fedora Extras, but there have been
problems caused by third party package repositories using /usr as their
prefix.


Some or all of those issues may have been avoidable if /opt/reponame had
been used as _prefix with a single file in /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ so the
shared libraries would work (without resorting to rpath) and a single
file in /etc/profile.d/ to adjust the man path and the execution path.


_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list