|From:||Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>|
|Subject:||Re: linux standard layout|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
"Daniel J. Summers" <daniel(dot)lists(at)djs-consulting(dot)com> writes:
> On 03/09/2010 05:31 AM, Ben Kim wrote:
>> I ask the question because sometimes I feel uneasy mixing rpms and
>> source compilation.
> Bingo. :) When I do have to compile, I compile AND create a package
> (if possible), then install the package.
+1. What's "unprofessional" is installing loose stuff into a
package-managed system. The specific packages produced by your system
vendor are not what you want? Fine, build your own and then install
those. You'll be able to track them, remove them, etc much more easily
than with an unpackaged source-code install. It's not that hard to
build your own packages in any of the popular packaging systems ---
especially not if there's a nearly-right package available for you to
study and modify.
BTW, I concur with Scott's statement that the choice to put this on a
virtualized server is a much bigger deal than rpm versus raw source.
At the end of the day, the installed software is the same with either of
those options --- a package makes it a bit easier to manage but that's
all. But a virtualization layer can kill your performance and/or
reliability. Ask hard questions about why that decision is being
imposed on you and what benefits it will have.
regards, tom lane
|Next Message||Scott Marlowe||2010-03-09 06:16:05||Re: linux standard layout|
|Previous Message||Plugge, Joe R.||2010-03-09 05:53:32||Re: linux standard layout|