Difference: SharedSoftware (5 vs. 6)

Revision 62005-12-21 - KirkKelsey

Line: 1 to 1
META TOPICPARENT name="SoftwareStuff"

Shared software installed in /usr/grads

Line: 41 to 41
  -- BenjaminVanDurme - 20 Dec 2005
First: I think the assumption should be that if you wants a new version of something that someone else installed, mention it to that person first. It doesn't seem worthwhile to state explicitly whether one plans to actually maintain something. Actually, I'm thinking about reformatting the list into a table. Objections?

Second: Having a consistent naming scheme in everyones $HOME would be nice, but I think its more important that people separate things they really intend for general consumption (i.e. separate ~/local/bin/ and ~/share/bin/). This will reduce the amount of cruft in /usr/grads/.

Omega: The problem with actually building in /usr/grads/ is that anyone can pile crap in there that noone else cares about. If you want something enough to install it, my feeling is that you should own it until someone else wants to take over, or get rid of it. I don't see having old versions of things floating around in peoples directories as an issue.

Having a myriad of links around the ~'s seems poor-form, but the sys-admin's policy on actually installing something includes keeping the source around, and having a makefile that someone else can run to recreate the binaries. Thats a lot to keep in one place.

My biggest concern is about permissions. In either case once someone installs something it cannot be replaced by another person. It looks like the sticky bit is the problem, but I don't know if I think taking it off is really better.

-- KirkKelsey - 21 Dec 2005

This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright © 2008-2019 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding URCS? Send feedback