EPEL Notes from .next discussion.

Chris Adams linux at cmadams.net
Wed Aug 13 17:52:31 UTC 2014

Once upon a time, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge at gmail.com> said:
> On 13 August 2014 06:28, Dennis Gilmore <dennis at ausil.us> wrote:
> > I disagree. FHS says that anything not part of the OS should go
> > in /opt/ EPEL is an add on and not part of the OS.
> >
> In the past we did not do this because we were bound by the Fedora
> Packaging Rules. I don't have the energy or want to try and fight that
> Windmill but I am not going to stand in someone who wants to.

"part of the OS" is somewhat vague.  My personal feeling (for the zero
it is worth) is that anything that is installed from yum repos
(especially non-conflicting repos) can be considered "part of the OS".
I usually consider /opt and /usr/local for stuff installed outside of
the OS-provided package management tools (even if said tools are
managing third-party repos).

The problem I'd see with moving stuff to /opt in EPEL is that it doesn't
get tested like that in Fedora, and causes definate diversion from
Fedora's "norms", so it puts more burden on packages.  Also, it makes it
somewhat more difficult to move something from a Fedora install to a
RHEL/CentOS+EPEL install (because paths would be different).

Chris Adams <linux at cmadams.net>

More information about the epel-devel mailing list