use of /usr/local by packages

Michael J. Lynch mlynch at gcom.com
Wed Aug 24 15:36:13 UTC 2005


Derek Broughton wrote:
> Alvin Thompson wrote:
> 
> 
>>i've noticed that several packages in the distribution place things
>>under /usr/local. i'm sure there are more, but these are a few i've run
>>across:
>>
>>eclipse (plugins)
>>python 2.4 (site packages)
>>whatever handles firmware
>>the font system (caches)
>>
>>i always thought it was a major _faux pas_ for a distribution to place
> 
> 
> yes.
> 
> However, I have no python or font files under /usr/local (I don't have
> eclipse, or anything firmware related, so I can't say that they don't use
> it), so I'm not sure you can validly complain that it was Ubuntu packages
> that did it.
> 
> Pick a file in /usr/local, do: dpkg -S filename
> 
> Then check the package it lists and make sure that _it_ used /usr/local (of
> course, there's nothing to prevent a package installing to a correct
> directory and moving files to /usr/local in the postinst, but if you're
> still suspicious you could check there too :-)

Quoting from the Debian Policy Manual

"As mandated by the FHS, packages must not place any files in
/usr/local, either by putting them in the file system archive
to be unpacked by dpkg or by manipulating them in their
maintainer scripts.

However, the package may create empty directories below /usr/local
so that the system administrator knows where to place site-specific
files.  These directories should be removed on package removal if
they are empty."


-- 
Michael J. Lynch

What if the hokey pokey IS what it's all about -- author unknown





More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list