> Opt would be a better fit if we're sticking to the FHS.
I agree on this, it's a better fit. But I think /usr/local is not a bad fit either as it's fundamentally a "local" installation of a program.
For me it always felt that /opt mainly exists for programs which don't follow the split required by the rest of the file system (bin, include, lib (, lib32, lib64), local, sbin, share, src) and I personally would prefer if /opt simply wouldn't be a think.
Either way for a single application container image placing that specific applications into /app seems fine tbh.. Through sadly as far as I can tell it mainly is that way because it's shorter to type in a Docker file then to repeat /opt/<package> all the time.
I agree on this, it's a better fit. But I think /usr/local is not a bad fit either as it's fundamentally a "local" installation of a program.
For me it always felt that /opt mainly exists for programs which don't follow the split required by the rest of the file system (bin, include, lib (, lib32, lib64), local, sbin, share, src) and I personally would prefer if /opt simply wouldn't be a think.
Either way for a single application container image placing that specific applications into /app seems fine tbh.. Through sadly as far as I can tell it mainly is that way because it's shorter to type in a Docker file then to repeat /opt/<package> all the time.