Re: OFA and Linux FHS (or other unix standards)

From: Jeremy Schneider <jeremy.schneider_at_ardentperf.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 10:16:33 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+fnDAaRS_V14EtD7YEsLAWOZj+vqEFSU9dJVCyuTASjaR3PKw_at_mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for point out that thread - I didn't come across it when searching.  Looks like I'm revisiting an old topic... reading the whole thread now... :)

-J

--
http://about.me/jeremy_schneider


On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Rich Jesse <
rjoralist3_at_society.servebeer.com> wrote:



> Jeremy writes:

>

> > This might be kinda far-fetched but I'm curious: has anyone ever tried to

> > reconcile FHS and OFA, or install Oracle binaries (both GI and DB) in an

> > FHS-compliant manner on linux systems?  Or more broadly, who is actually

> > using OFA in some manifestation besides "/u##/app" to conform to any

> > site-specific or broader unix standard?

> >

> > OFA and FHS were both created in the context of old unix standards and

> > explicitly reference them. So I would think that there ought to be some

> > philosophically correct way to reconcile them.

>

> Is FHS still relevant or has it been replaced by something else?  For

> example, Apache's default location for document root on many distros is now

> /var/www/html (which I loathe), but that's outside of the recommendation of

> the FHS article you linked, that states that /var is for temporary and

> transient data.

>

> Also, Cary has responded on this list about OFA questions and the reasoning

> behind the /u## recommendation (and the ".log" redo extension!):

>

>

> http://www.freelists.org/post/oracle-l/a-quick-poll-regarding-the-11gR2-OFA,29

>

> I've always used a modified version of OFA that adheres to the layout, but

> with changes to the names to protect the innocent.  And the DBA.  And the

> SA...

>

> Rich

>

> --

> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

>

>

>


--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Wed Aug 20 2014 - 16:16:33 CEST