"Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The FHS is quite flexible in this respect. Personally, I like
> /usr/local for stuff that I compile myself.
>
> Stuff that goes in /opt includes monolithic apps which I get in binary
> form.
IIRC that split is what's generally recommended -- /usr
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 19:07:52 +0700
"Ali Milis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Suppose there exists large-company.com and
> branch1.large-company.com. Both are producing "local packages"
> which may conflict with each others.
/opt may be better for one, since there may be conflict. The
FHS
Ali Milis wrote:
> Suppose there exists large-company.com and
> branch1.large-company.com. Both are producing "local packages"
> which may conflict with each others.
My understanding is that /opt is the kosher way to do this; you have the
right idea.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTE
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 07:07:52PM +0700, Ali Milis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Suppose there exists large-company.com and
> branch1.large-company.com. Both are producing "local packages"
> which may conflict with each others.
>
> Question:
> Is it OK to use /opt/com/large-company/ and
> /opt/com/large-comp
On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 03:19:15PM +0300, Sergey Lapin wrote:
> Hello, all!!!
>
> I have big collection of self-made packages, which I would like to
> distribute through my network via usual apt-get methods while allowing
> them to update from Debian sites. Connection is only by http,
> so I hav
5 matches
Mail list logo
