Finding a Successor to the FHS
1–10 of 22 posts
Re: Finding a Successor to the FHS
#2> Last year, postmarketOS core developer Pablo Correa Gomez and a few others started an effort to move the FHS work under the freedesktop.org banner and create 4.0 of the standard
No. freedesktop.org is the place where standards go to die and CADT development takes place.
Re: Finding a Successor to the FHS
#3A little surprised that the linked systemd file-hierarchy(7) manpage makes no mention of /opt
Re: Finding a Successor to the FHS
#4A little surprised that the linked systemd file-hierarchy(7) manpage makes no mention of /opt
/opt/ is just a dumping ground for crap nobody can find a better location for
Re: Finding a Successor to the FHS
#5>there's far less emphasis on creating native distribution packages for third-party software in 2025. Flatpaks, Snaps, and AppImage packages seem more popular with desktop-application developers these days. A lot of server-side software is now expected to be deployed as a container—or a group of containers run in Kubernetes—rather than installed as a package.
Are CLI tools or low-level, privileged software (e.g. anything that requires root) also distributed using flatpak or snap these days?
Re: Finding a Successor to the FHS
#6>there's far less emphasis on creating native distribution packages for third-party software in 2025. Flatpaks, Snaps, and AppImage packages seem more popular with desktop-application developers these days. A lot of server-side software is now expected to be deployed as a container—or a group of containers run in Kubernetes—rather than installed as a package. Are CLI tools or low-level, privileged software (e.g. anyt…
Ubuntu distributes some system daemons and even the kernel image as Snaps. The Ubuntu Server interactive installer nags you to look at a list of server software (such as nginx) to install using Snap.
Flatpak hasn't really taken the same path, it doesn't have much utility for anything other than desktop apps.
Re: Finding a Successor to the FHS
#7Re: Finding a Successor to the FHS
#8>there's far less emphasis on creating native distribution packages for third-party software in 2025. Flatpaks, Snaps, and AppImage packages seem more popular with desktop-application developers these days. A lot of server-side software is now expected to be deployed as a container—or a group of containers run in Kubernetes—rather than installed as a package. Are CLI tools or low-level, privileged software (e.g. anyt…
Ubuntu distributes some system daemons and even the kernel image as Snaps. The Ubuntu Server interactive installer nags you to look at a list of server software (such as nginx) to install using Snap. Flatpak hasn't really taken the same path, it doesn't have much utility for anything other than desktop apps.
There is toolbox, see https://github.com/containers/toolbox.
Re: Finding a Successor to the FHS
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
/opt/ is just a dumping ground for crap nobody can find a better location for
Where else would ./install-3rdparty-software.sh write to? Should it spray files all over /usr?
It shouldn't do anything until the user has told it where the files should end up. It's an unpackaged program, there is no sane place to put it that doesn't have a high chance of conflicting with something else.
Re: Finding a Successor to the FHS
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
/opt/ is just a dumping ground for crap nobody can find a better location for
Where else would ./install-3rdparty-software.sh write to? Should it spray files all over /usr?
Honestly there should be no install-bs.sh and you just bind everything into the file tree as needed. At least that is how it works on Plan 9 which simplifies a lot of things like path which is just '/bin.'