Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
- To: Erik Troan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Cc: Daniel Quinlan <email@example.com>, Thomas Sippel - Dau <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
- From: Daniel Quinlan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 12:54:06 -0800
- Message-id: <[🔎] 199901252054.MAA16413@sodium.transmeta.com>
- Reply-to: email@example.com
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <[🔎] 199901252009.MAA15770@sodium.transmeta.com> <[🔎] Pine.LNX.email@example.com>
Daniel Quinlan <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> New systems would need to have a /var/spool/mail -> /var/mail symbolic
>> link for about two years.
Erik Troan <email@example.com> writes:
> No, forever. Red Hat is promising an upgrade path for a lot longer then two
> years -- we've already provided upgradeable distributions for 3.5.
I said "new systems", not systems that are being upgraded.
> You seem to be ignoring the upgrade issue. Allowing in-place upgrades
> necessetates /var/spool/mail to exist in some form.
I'm not ignoring it, I just don't think it's a problem.
If today's in-place upgrades don't allow /var/spool/mail to be a
symbolic link, then they are broken. The same would be true for
/var/mail on a system that still mounted the spool on /var/spool/mail.