Je pense qu'on y gagnerait beaucoup en lisibilité si toutes les applis avaient respecté dès le début un tel schéma.
"Do you want to change the standard ?
[...] we believe it is the duty of each application to allow itself to be installed anywhere and to accept that other applications it needs to work with may be installed anywhere (more on this in the next section). Now, if there was a standard stating this, I'd even sign a petition to support it. In fact, there is: the GNU release standards, when they recommend the usage of GNU Autotools, supporting the -prefix family of switches, and probing for the location of applications with the configure script, do just that. But when a proposed standard like the FHS gives me an arbitrary list of binaries that should be, for unexplained reasons, in a separate directory, I laugh at that." http://www.gobolinux.org/index.php?page=doc/articles/clueles(...)
[^] # Re: Organisation des fichiers de conf dans le /home
Posté par Séverin Tagliante-Saracino . En réponse au journal Ca va troller: un nouveau regedit pour GNU/Linux & *BSD. Évalué à 0.
"Do you want to change the standard ?
[...] we believe it is the duty of each application to allow itself to be installed anywhere and to accept that other applications it needs to work with may be installed anywhere (more on this in the next section). Now, if there was a standard stating this, I'd even sign a petition to support it. In fact, there is: the GNU release standards, when they recommend the usage of GNU Autotools, supporting the -prefix family of switches, and probing for the location of applications with the configure script, do just that. But when a proposed standard like the FHS gives me an arbitrary list of binaries that should be, for unexplained reasons, in a separate directory, I laugh at that."
http://www.gobolinux.org/index.php?page=doc/articles/clueles(...)