Proposal : Installing linuxcnc in /opt/ directory

- do normal user need to edit linuxcnc files, or look into them? (not the machine config files)
I think a normal user will not edit linuxcnc source files.

- Do we / the user will have a real benefit of implementing a new file herachy?
It's not really a new hierarchy. It's only distributed as .deb package like a git download hierarchy into one folder.
The user will see the same as the developper in that case.

The only difference is how the deb package is build (packed) and unpacked. I already mentioned it's a waste to change the
current subfolder hierarchy.

One benefith could be making a AppImage for linuxcnc. Just as Freecad has everything inside one file (folder). Even the addon updates work from within the AppImage.

Another benefith could be implementing the Doxygen documentation format (auto builded documentation in pdf or as webpage).
This is really handy for develloppers and users.
I am quite curious how the Doxygen is making the documentation for the Linuxcnc project. Maybe test this soon?

We have just in relation to python 3 a lot of work to do, so let us check this side.
Yes. But i have good news. In debian 11 there are libraries that port Python2 to Python3 for linuxcnc. This works ok.
The kernel of debian 11 has some tiny problem's with hardware. I am working on it.

andypugh wrote:

arvidb wrote:

The one thing that I find weird about linuxcnc's install paths is the config files located in ~/linuxcnc! Typically these would be under /etc/linuxcnc/, or possibly, if linuxcnc ran as its own user, under /home/linuxcnc/configs/ or something like that.

This _might_ be because the config files are intended to be edited by the user, without having administrator privileges?

The user must have admin privileges to install the linuxcnc package in the first place. But I assume this has been discussed to death over the years already, and either way I'm not suggesting changing this and forcing everyone to adapt. I just find it weird/unusual, that's all.

Hi,

The user must have admin privileges to install the linuxcnc package in the first place.
With all the deb packages to install you need a sudo. I think therefore Linux is quite sequre.
If you can do anything without sudo, vulnerability increases.

At the moment i have a deb package finished with linuxcnc installed in the /opt/ folder. With a linuxcnc launcher in
the system menu.

Then i had to find a solution for linuxcnc-ethercat, where to place this directory?
I have made a /opt/linuxcnc/addons/ folder.

There is linuxcnc-ethercat installed as addon. Just like Freecad has more off the less this structure for addon's.

Everything seems very structured now.

I am happy now.

andypugh wrote:

I am open to the idea, but suspect it is a decision to be made by the 2,9 release manager.

(No, I don't think that we have one yet)

I thought you had that job for life

I vote oke too.

In general. The proposal has no hurry.

I remember working with /opt installation locations.
On one hand it was clean to keep everything there for, say, a major FEM package.
On the other hand it was always a hassle to get /opt/package/bin in the PATH
and /opt/package/lib for LD_LIBRARY_PATH, and MANPATH and that's how far I remember.
I don't particularly like the idea of /opt but if all those things can be fixed, why not?

Hi Hakan,

Yes, export path's or linkers have to be placed with some programs. With linuxcnc everything works within the /opt/ dir.

My idea is to make a special desktop launcher that can do multiple executions in a row.
If a program in the /opt/ needs something different elsewhere, the second laucher argument can do a export command.
An appimage launcher as desktop launcher replacement. You could use u bash between script. But that is not so elegant.

Another thing i am worrying about is the .deb package preinst script. It refuses to do a "apt-get install .."
Do someone has an idea to solve this? You could pack a .deb in a Appimage. This would do it all.