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

Re: Comments on FHS testsuite run

On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Daniel Quinlan wrote:

> Wichert Akkerman writes:
> [...]
> > * Reference 5.1-1: /var/account missing
> >   Reason: bug in Debian
> > 
> >   Should be added as an empty dir to base-files
> Yes.

I disagree. This directory should be provided by whatever package in
Debian provides process accounting, if we want to follow the spirit of
the standard when it says that some items are optional[*]. Where
exactly it is stated in FHS that this (and other directories) *must*
exist? I have only seen explicit requirement of existence for
directories like /var/lib/misc (and that's why I added it to
base-files). What about all the other "opt" directories? Do they have
to exist in the "must" sense? If so, FHS is buggy by not explicitly
saying so.

       Note that an implementation does not need to contain all the files and
       directories specified in this standard to be compliant or compatible.
       Only the files and directories an implementation actually contains need
       to be located appropriately.  For example, if a particular filesystem is
       not supported by a distribution, the tools for that filesystem need not
       be included, even though they may be explicitly listed in this standard.

I understand this in the sense that files and directories may be owned
by whatever package manages them, unless there is an explicit "must exist"
in FHS about them (like the one for /var/lib/misc).

If my interpretation is wrong, I would like FHS to be clarified.

[ Sorry for the long Cc: ]

Reply to: