Re: /usr/local vs. /opt

["A. G." <prothonotar tarnation dyndns org>]

On Fri, 2005-09-16 at 08:12 -0400, Steve Snyder wrote:
> Is there a standard or rule-of-thumb regarding location of non-distribution 
> software packages?  I've read the HFS spec, but I'm still not clear on this.
> 
> Some packages, both RPM-based and tarballs, want to install in /opt and others 
> in /usr/local.  I don't perceive a pattern to where a given type of 
> installation prefers to install its files.
> 
> Given a choice in locations, where should I opt to install RPM packages, and 
> where should non-RPM software go?
> 

My preference is to put things which are spread out over the filesystem
(e.g. <prefix>/bin, <prefix>/lib, <prefix>/man, etc.) into /usr/local.
Also, one-file packages (like alac) I usually stick in /usr/local as
well. 

Things which are (or which I'd like to keep) self-contained in one
directory hiearchy (e.g. <prefix>/<pkg>/bin, <prefix>/<pkg>/lib, etc.) I
put into opt. The nice thing about the latter is that you can just rm
-rf <prefix>/<pkg> and be done with it.

Note that I usually don't follow the FHS for /opt by creating
an /opt/bin and other 2nd level directories that I'm supposed to. I
rarely see the point of that (then it's basically the same
as /usr/local).

-- 
prothonotar at tarnation dot dyndns dot org