why chrome and why in /opt

zalew · 2012-04-24 07:29:12

1. why #! installs chrome instead of chromium?

2. why chrome lands in /opt/?

Last edited by zalew (2012-04-24 07:33:17)

ivanovnegro · 2012-04-24 08:40:39

I never was aware that #! installs Chrome, how? AFAIK it comes with Iceweasel by default.

I also would always recommend to install Chrome instead of Chromium on a Debian Stable based system just because it is easier to have the shiny new thing as Chromium is rather old in Squeeze.

Not sure if Chrome lands in /opt, but it automagically adds itself to your sources list, maybe it is that. I have nothing in /opt anyway. That should be the directory for apps that you did not install from the actual repos if I remember.

zalew · 2012-04-24 09:17:47

afaik /opt usage at all means is outdated, stuff should land in /usr/local. even during the partitioning process there are no longer separate /opt partitions. due to that, when I installed chrome (from the menu) it made an /opt on root partition (facepalm) and I had to get rid of it by symlinking /opt to a /usr/local/opt as the chrome update screamed for no space left on device. sigh. making an /opt on a root partition and dropping stuff in there is incredibley stupid. when I purged chrome, /opt (along with my brilliant /usr/local/opt ) got removed.

I also would always recommend to install Chrome instead of Chromium on a Debian Stable based system just because it is easier to have the shiny new thing as Chromium is rather old in Squeeze.

oh, right. I'm still not used to stable+bp as I run sid on my main machine.

Last edited by zalew (2012-04-24 09:27:31)

ivanovnegro · 2012-04-24 09:28:38

Maybe someone else can clarify here. I only once installed Chrome to my Sid system just to test for other users to help them and I got rid of it with no issue.

zalew · 2012-04-24 09:41:42

I also got rid with no issue, the install makes the problem big_smile

pvsage · 2012-04-24 13:43:10

Which version of the Live Hybrid did you install from? Sounds like you have one of the initial releases from February 2011; those had Chrome. The November 2011 and February 2012 releases came/come with Iceweasel.

zalew · 2012-04-24 13:57:38

It came with iceweasel. Installed chrome from the menu.

I got the last backports release.

Awebb · 2012-04-24 19:12:29

Nothing besides the administrator's local packages should ever be installed to /usr/local. You have some reading to do. If a package manager installs anything to /usr/local, I will change the distro. /opt is the right place for that. But yes, if anything as crucial as a browser needs to be packaged to land in /opt, it's a shitty browser.

But please, care to use the board search next time or go a little more in depth with your questions, we can't smell why you feel uneasy having it that way. The chrome question has been asked and answered so many times. Now they ask "Why Iceaweasel?" and in the next release they will ask "Where's X?" if that unconstructive nagging goes on.

el_koraco · 2012-04-24 19:21:11

Awebb wrote:

But yes, if anything as crucial as a browser needs to be packaged to land in /opt, it's a shitty browser.

That's some kind of rule for out of repository programs packaged by third parties. Not that every developer follows it. I do know that Libreoffice is installed to /opt if you install the provided debs, and I think Opera's deb does the same.

@zalew
/usr/local/opt?

ls /usr/local
bin/  etc/  games/  include/  lib/  man@  sbin/  share/  src/

Awebb · 2012-04-25 14:49:52

el_koraco wrote:

That's some kind of rule for out of repository programs packaged by third parties. Not that every developer follows it.

Debian's way of saying: Ewww, that's not my junk? :-D

zalew · 2012-04-25 15:35:48

Awebb wrote:

Nothing besides the administrator's local packages should ever be installed to /usr/local. You have some reading to do. If a package manager installs anything to /usr/local, I will change the distro. /opt is the right place for that. But yes, if anything as crucial as a browser needs to be packaged to land in /opt, it's a shitty browser.

rly? If so, I wonder why after having a debian installed for years, one single package haven't landed in /opt if it's "the right place".
Please explain me what you mean by putting something in /usr/local "changes the distro"

Maybe I have some reading to do, maybe I even partly did some. Now it's time to do yours, google for /opt vs /usr/local, these discussions are older than coal
http://www.linuxjournal.com/magazine/po … s-usrlocal

I provided actual information how it affected me and why it's a flaw
- no other stuff lands in /opt so far
- #! doesn't provide /opt as a separate partition during partitioning
- #! sets root to 330mb which is sufficient for the OS alone, but not if people drop heavy stuff in the /opt which resides there (hence my symlink)

I see no reasons why anyone would defend the idea of dropping chrome in there.

But please, care to use the board search next time or go a little more in depth with your questions, we can't smell why you feel uneasy having it that way. The chrome question has been asked and answered so many times. Now they ask "Why Iceaweasel?" and in the next release they will ask "Where's X?" if that unconstructive nagging goes on.

ok. I don't care about the chrome/chromium that much, was just surprised to see it.

el_koraco: could you read carefully my post? I explicitly said I made up the /usr/local/opt just to get rid of chrome from root, it wasn't created by system. From what I see on the interwebs that's not uncommon for people to do, and for the same reason (to get rid of /opt on root)

Last edited by zalew (2012-04-25 15:39:23)

Awebb · 2012-04-25 20:45:01

1. As you said, this discussion is as old as packaging itself. Nothing has been decided. You ask your questions as if there was anything to ask, instead you use them as a lever to elevate your opinions. I'm really sorry for those people who actually try to answer such "questions", even if they're asked in that certain manner Linux users are notorious to make use of among the IT community. It must be those hecklers who spoil the invitations to the important events for the rest of us.

2. /usr/local is distribution independant. Since Crunchbang sees itself as a distribution, it provides packages via it's own repository. Although it snatches a big piece of the Debian pie in the process, the Crunchbang distribution sees priority in it's own repository - as you might see when you have a glimpse at the order of repositories in the config file. Therefore, no package has any business installing even the smallest file anywhere into the /usr/local tree.

Why? FSH.

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.
Locally installed software must be placed within /usr/local rather than /usr unless it is being installed to replace or upgrade software in /usr.

Even the link you posted states, that the discussion is about what a system administrator should do, not a packager. Well done reading something and being assimilated into an opinion by the better presentation of arguments. That's how the ancient Greeks settled things: Better presentation ruled over rationality and truth. Look where that got them.

Last edited by Awebb (2012-04-25 20:46:55)

zalew · 2012-04-25 22:06:02

cool story, bro.

carry on with yo passive-aggresive tone, ad hominem, and possibly a dozen fallacies in there; that's the problem of certain linux communities where someone can't address the problem and gets into bullshit nitpicking and pissing contests.

I explicitely specified the problem with putting crap in opt (which is on root by default), if you don't see a problem, ktxbye.

ivanovnegro · 2012-04-25 22:49:03

Now, I see, one thing I have in /opt and forgot about it is Google Talk Plugin. big_smile

Anyway that whole L*onel R*ch*e does not matter and @zalew, do not be offended, it is the freakin' @Awebb who speaks. cool

zalew · 2012-04-25 22:58:17

do not be offended, by I don't know who awebb is, and even if I knew, I don't give a fuck about celebrity status IRL nor on the internet, that's how I roll, deal with it tongue I just like when spotted issues are discussed and (if possible) solved, there's enough rtfm+thesystemisawesomeanditsallyourfault+circlejerk attitude on some (ekhem) forums. I may be wrong (if asking questions can be wrong), but I think I specified enough why I think it *is* a fault.
I demand answers ASAP or you're all fired! what am I paying for?!

Last edited by zalew (2012-04-25 22:59:09)

ivanovnegro · 2012-04-25 23:01:49

zalew wrote:

I demand answers ASAP or you're all fired! what am I paying for?!

roll Chill!! We have pizza.

I never saw any money from you. smile

snowpine · 2012-04-25 23:02:41

zalew, we try to maintain a respectful community here.

closed.

CrunchBang Linux

SEARCH

#1 2012-04-24 07:29:12

why chrome and why in /opt

#2 2012-04-24 08:40:39

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#3 2012-04-24 09:17:47

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#4 2012-04-24 09:28:38

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#5 2012-04-24 09:41:42

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#6 2012-04-24 13:43:10

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#7 2012-04-24 13:57:38

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#8 2012-04-24 19:12:29

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#9 2012-04-24 19:21:11

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#10 2012-04-25 14:49:52

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#11 2012-04-25 15:35:48

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#12 2012-04-25 20:45:01

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#13 2012-04-25 22:06:02

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#14 2012-04-25 22:49:03

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#15 2012-04-25 22:58:17

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#16 2012-04-25 23:01:49

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

#17 2012-04-25 23:02:41

Re: why chrome and why in /opt

Board footer