Re: /usr vs. root was: /etc /usr/etc
On 7 Jul 1997, Carey Evans wrote:
> Vadim Vygonets <vadik@cs.huji.ac.il> writes:
>
> > On 6 Jul 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > > So, we decide on placing files dependeing on where the
> > > upstream sources put their files? This does not sound like a sound
> > > technical policy to me. Remember, most authors do not write with
> > > Debian's file system discipline in mind.
> >
> > And you know why? Because other Unices have similar filesystems,
> > i.e., noone puts site-wide conffiles in /etc. The authors kept in
> > mind the more technical definition of files which must go to /usr,
> > that is, the files that don't have to be different on the machines
> > across the network (like hostname), aren't essential for boot or
> > single-user mode maintainance.
>
> [snip]
>
> Some authors feel a bit differently. Dan Bernstein, for example,
> thinks that all a program's files should go in the same place, and
> that /var is a good place for this (/var/qmail). Other packages do
> this by default as well, like apache and jed.
It isn't in /usr because qmail and http daemons are machine-local, not
essential for booting or maintainance, and they have plenty of files,
while the root partition is usually limited to something like 16M.
And about jed: I thought that it puts conffiles in /usr/local/lib or
/usr/lib... Am I wrong?
Vadik.
--
Vadim Vygonets * vadik@cs.huji.ac.il * vadik@debian.org * Unix admin
The fish doesn't think, because the fish knows... everything.
-- Arizona Dream
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: