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

Re: convenience script for building a.out packages

'Bill Mitchell wrote:'
>Scott Blachowicz <scott@statsci.com> said:
>> Ian Jackson <ian@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>> > I agree.  But, now you see that we have a script called /usr/bin/aout
>> > and a potential directory called /usr/bin/aout.  Hence my suggestion
>> > that it ought to be called something else.  with-aout perhaps.
>> Actually, I would argue that the _directory_ be someWHERE else.  [...]
>Good point.  From FSSTND 1.2, 3/28/95, section 3.1, para three:
>  There should be no subdirectories within /bin.
>Given the intention of FSSTND compliance, this is an absolute

But what does FSSTND say about subdirectories of /usr/bin?  I would
hate to have the mh utilities stored in with the illions of programs
already in /usr/bin.  And where would the netpbm tools be stored [I
dislike Red Hat's solution of all >100 utilities getting mixed up in
/usr/bin]?  Anyway, I'd like an option to avoid having > 500 programs
in /usr/bin.  Let "modularity" ring :)

Christopher J. Fearnley            |    UNIX SIG Leader at PACS
cjf@netaxs.com (finger me!)        |    (Philadelphia Area Computer Society)
cfearnl@pacs.pha.pa.us             |    Design Science Revolutionary
http://www.netaxs.com/~cjf         |    Explorer in Universe
"Dare to be Naive" -- Bucky Fuller |    Linux Advocate

Reply to: