/usr/local vs. /opt

[Gordon Keehn]

Les Mikesell wrote:

>On Fri, 2005-09-16 at 07:54, David Mackintosh wrote:
>  
>
>>>Given a choice in locations, where should I opt to install RPM packages, and 
>>>where should non-RPM software go?
>>>      
>>>
>>Wherever you think you'll find it later. :)
>>
>>We've gone through several iterations here.  If the software is going
>>to be used by multiple machines, I put it in /usr/local because my
>>/usr/local tree is nfs-shared across my network.  (Yes, I'm grimly
>>aware of a non-local 'local' directory.) If it is a major package
>>that is likely to be superceded by a superior version in the future,
>>it generally gets installed into /tools which is an autofs, and users
>>get directed to manipulate their environments so that they can use
>>the appropriate version.  If it is going to be run locally, or is
>>important that it only run locally (because it keeps some kind of
>>state that is important), then it gets installed in /opt.  
>>
>>No matter what you chose, someone will always have an excellent
>>reason why it should go somewhere else.
>>    
>>
>
>Exactly.  This is sort of like asking what private IP address
>range you should use for a local network.  In that case the
>answer is one that isn't used by a company you might merge
>with...  Likewise for software you just need to use a space
>that no one else will use.  Things that install from source
>usually go under /usr/local by default with a configure
>option to move elsewhere.  Packaged items that aren't part
>of a standard distribution often go under /opt.
>
Hi, Guys
    FWIW, I defined /opt as a symbolic link to /usr/local primarily so 
they could share the same partition.  While there are exceptions, 
packages which normally install in /opt usually create a unique 
subdirectory /opt/<product>, while packages which install in /usr/local 
use the standard subdirectories, ./bin, ./lib, etc. so I can tell who 
got there by which path.
    Cheers,
Gordon Keehn