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
>prohibition.
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: