[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#594658: debian-policy: Add FHS exception for GNU/Hurd directories



On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 17:05 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Andrew McMillan <andrew@morphoss.com> writes:
> 
> > I would change the text around a little to add that to the beginning of
> > the paragraph, something like:
> 
> >         On GNU/Hurd systems the <file>/hurd</file> and
> >         <file>/servers</file> directories are also allowed in the root
> >         filesystem.  <footnote>These directories are used to store
> >         translators and as a set of standard names for mount points
> >         respectively.</footnote>
> 
> > Ordering the words in this way means the reader can decide it's
> > applicability much faster.  Perhaps splitting the footnote into two
> > footnotes might help also:
> 
> >         ... <file>/hurd</file><footnote>Used to store
> >         translators.</footnote> and <file>/servers</file><footnote>Used
> >         as a set of standard names for mount points.</footnote> ...
> 
> Our footnote system is not great, so I'd keep it as one footnote.  I agree
> with putting GNU/Hurd first, but I'd like to keep the structure of listing
> the exceptions after a colon to match the other item.  So, how about:
> 
>     On GNU/Hurd systems, the following additional directories are allowed
>     in the root filesystem: <file>/hurd</file> and <file>/servers</file>.
>     <footnote>
>       These directories are used to store translators and as a set of
>       standard names for mount points, respectively.
>     </footnote>
> 

All good reasons so let's go with that one then.

Cheers,
					Andrew.
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
andrew (AT) morphoss (DOT) com                            +64(272)DEBIAN
            Water, taken in moderation cannot hurt anybody.
                             -- Mark Twain

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: