Re: Re: Debian BSD.. cool idea
On Sat, Feb 19, 2000 at 02:47:34PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> And why not? Try reading the FHS -- there's rationale in there for
> everything. It all makes perfect sense to me -- /usr/local/var is a load
> of crap, if you want to label something.
Make /usr/local/var a symlink then to /var.
_local_ means it is managed by the local user.
> The FHS's idea is that /usr is static and can be mounted read-only.
> Therefore /usr/local/var and /usr/local/etc are out of place. Of course
> our users can make them if they want, because /usr/local is entirely up
> to the local admin. But you guys are shipping it out of the box ...
You can mount /usr read-only on a FreeBSD box, and _never_ change it.
Just have /usr/local be read-write.
> > There are only a handful of the 3,071 ports/packages that out and out
> > conflict with another. And it is documented in the readme..
>
> Then you probably don't have anywhere near the number of packages we do,
> because we have a lot of stuff that conflicts. For example, I maintain
> a package of the xpdf GPL PDF viewer; we have a decryption-enabled version
> stored on free-world servers, and the normal version stored on police-state
> servers (ie the USA). These conflict because they both provide /usr/bin/xpdf,
> which makes perfect sense.
We've got about 3,110 ports now. How many do you have?
But the number of ports that truly conflict are under well under 100, if I had
to guess. (Not counting ports for speakers of different languages)
> > Less than ideal, yes, but it is being addressed in designing the 2nd-gen
> > package system. Debian can feel free to step in and relicense code/donate
> > time to help make our package system better. Everyone would be happier :)
>
> You're welcome to our code, it's under the GPL.
There isn't a big push to make key components of the OS under the GPL, sorry.
-Dan
Reply to: