Re: Comments on FHS testsuite run
Previously Santiago Vila wrote:
> In either case, if by "infraestructure" you mean one or two empty
> directories, I would say foreign apps which do not install rightly
> because of these directories not being preset are broken, and we have
> no need to support broken software.
I disagree. ISVs will write software for machines with the full expectation
that they are LSB and FHS compliant. (At the moment we have the LDPS
which says FHS compliant already). FHS clearly mentions that certain
directories where certain data is supposed to be kept, and ISVs will
expect those to exist.
We should not expect third-party software to check if all directories
the FHS lists are present: we should make things easy for ISVs and make
sure all the infrastructure they depend upon is already there.
Wichert.
--
_________________________________________________________________
/ Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \
| wichert@cistron.nl http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Reply to: