Should files in /usr be edited for configuration of applications

Smartsasse · 2014-10-23 11:58:14

In Arch wiki under Arch filesystem hierarchy it states that /usr is "Shareable, read-only data" and that:

... /usr shall be shareable between various hosts and must not be written to, except by the package manager (installation, update, upgrade)

But on many places and documentation for different applications I find information like "Edit the /usr/share/myprogram/..." file ...".

So I'm wondering, how should I do? It seems like not all programs first check in "$HOME/.local/share" or "$HOME/.config" or "$HOME". So should I just go ahead and edit the files under /usr/share/ if I want them changed or is there another solution?

WorMzy · 2014-10-23 12:10:31

Smartsasse wrote:

But on many places and documentation for different applications I find information like "Edit the /usr/share/myprogram/..." file ...".

Could you provide an example?

Scimmia · 2014-10-23 12:36:34

Very rarely, only when no other options exist. The only one I know of off the top of my head is KDM, which is getting killed off anyway.

drcouzelis · 2014-10-23 12:39:33

As WorMzy suggested, examples and details are very important.

Smartsasse wrote:

But on many places and documentation

What? Which documentation?

for different applications

Which applications?

So I'm wondering, how should I do?

How should you do what?

It seems like not all programs first check in "$HOME/.local/share" or "$HOME/.config" or "$HOME".

Which programs?

So should I just go ahead and edit the files under /usr/share/ if I want them changed or is there another solution?

If you need to change a file that is not in your home directory, then the other solution is: Create a custom package (by making a PKGBUILD file) and install it with pacman. It's a good solution and is simple to do.

Last edited by drcouzelis (2014-10-23 12:40:56)

Smartsasse · 2014-10-24 06:59:34

@drcouzelis: Many mistakes about missing details from my side. I don't know how many of them I'll find but I'll try my best. Gonna go away for the weekend dough, maybe will have time sunday evening to answer your questions.

olive · 2014-10-24 08:03:28

The answer is no the system is made in order that /usr witll not be edited. But Linux and particularly Archlinux is geek-friendly and the idea of free software is that you could be able to adjust/patch/modify the system to your need. I have myself modified a few files in /usr and I have also make a few modification to the source code of some packages. But you should know what you are doing.

Moo-Crumpus · 2014-10-24 08:24:05

This is how I handle it:

Set only some options for all users > /usr/share
Set options for selections of users > ~/.local/share

and I don't pay a nickle for the system is made in order for don't do it.

olive · 2014-10-26 19:11:12

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

This is how I handle it:
Set only some options for all users > /usr/share
Set options for selections of users > ~/.local/share
and I don't pay a nickle for the system is made in order for don't do it.

Yes this is the general idea. But that'q depends how far you want to tweak the system. Myself I have patched the source code (or the ./configure options) of a few packages, recompiled them and install them. Of course, I put modified binaries in /usr if I do that. Shouldn't I do that? Well the very idea of Free/OSS software is that you can modify them if you want. I don't think that saying that this shouldn't be done match this idea.

Awebb · 2014-10-26 20:12:51

You can do whatever you want. If you choose to do something that is against a standard, common good practice or otherwise discouraged, you need to be aware that you are on your own. You should never deviate too far from the respective FHS in a professional environment, if you insist, however, you will give everybody else a hard time. If you come to the forums and ask for help, we might ask you to clean up the mess you have created by ignoring the specifications, before we can be sure, that your problem was not caused by your wild patch growth in the first place.

Moo-Crumpus · 2014-10-27 13:02:02

Changed my mind after just having had f****d up my set of configurations.

Doing this there and that here makes it hard to have backups. I think this is on of the basic ideas of having it all inside of home.

Now I try to have everything configurated in ~/.config, which is a link from /home/myname/documents/linux/mymachine_myname_linux_config, beeing in sync with my nas via btsync. Doing it this way, I can even use the same config on my laptop and my workstation.

Of course, I could sync my hole /home/myname folder, but I have a mix of windows and linux machines, and I neither like the windows applikation folders on linux, nor the bash history in my windows profile. But I allways had a copy of configuration files in my documents

Arch Linux

#1 2014-10-23 11:58:14

Should files in /usr be edited for configuration of applications

#2 2014-10-23 12:10:31

Re: Should files in /usr be edited for configuration of applications

#3 2014-10-23 12:36:34

Re: Should files in /usr be edited for configuration of applications

#4 2014-10-23 12:39:33

Re: Should files in /usr be edited for configuration of applications

#5 2014-10-24 06:59:34

Re: Should files in /usr be edited for configuration of applications

#6 2014-10-24 08:03:28

Re: Should files in /usr be edited for configuration of applications

#7 2014-10-24 08:24:05

Re: Should files in /usr be edited for configuration of applications

#8 2014-10-26 19:11:12

Re: Should files in /usr be edited for configuration of applications

#9 2014-10-26 20:12:51

Re: Should files in /usr be edited for configuration of applications

#10 2014-10-27 13:02:02

Re: Should files in /usr be edited for configuration of applications

Board footer