Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
- To: tytso@MIT.EDU (Theodore Y. Ts'o)
- Cc: alan@cymru.net, quinlan@transmeta.com, gordon.m.tetlow@vanderbilt.edu, florian@suse.de, hpa@transmeta.com, ewt@redhat.com, fhs-discuss@ucsd.edu, ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org, lsb-test@linuxbase.org, lsb-spec@linuxbase.org, lsb-spec@lists.linuxbase.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
- From: Alan Cox <alan@cymru.net>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 11:14:55 +0000 (GMT)
- Message-id: <[🔎] 199901261114.LAA02413@snowcrash.cymru.net>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 199901260554.AAA03434@dcl> from "Theodore Y. Ts'o" at Jan 26, 99 00:54:57 am
> But I don't think the FHS should be specifying the actual location of
> the files at all. True, the FHS should not cause too much pain for the
Ok good we agree on this
> The only thing that really matters is what pathnames applications can
> count upon to work. Given that the rest of the world is moving to
Right now every package you build for linux assumes /var/spool/mail. I dont
actually care what the rest of the world is doing. From a rather brutal
point of view _we_ are becoming the rest of the world.
> /var/mail, I think it would be good for us to start a gradual migration
> to /var/mail. The extra symlink doesn't cost anything, and gradually
> moving applications over to use /var/mail really doesn't cost much
> either.
By the time we migrate to /var/mail and annoy alll the vendors - netscape,
applix, zmail and the like the old style unix mail format will be dying.
It seems to be pain for the sake of it. If all the Linux vendors already
used /var/mail and you said "lets use /var/spool/mail" I'd be equally
opposed.
Reply to: