Re: horse carcas flogging (was: traceroute in /usr/bin, not /usr/sbin)
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 07:47:32PM -0400, Rene Weber wrote:
> The problem is that not everyone agrees that traceroute (for example)
> is violating the FHS.
precisely.
the "traceroute belongs in /usr/bin because FHS says so" is based on a
debatable interpretation of the FHS, and a highly debatable assessment
of traceroute's status as a "user" tool rather than an "admin" tool.
some people are saying that because traceroute CAN be executed by a user,
that makes it a user tool.
*exactly* the same can be said for ifconfig and dozens of other programs
in /sbin and /usr/sbin.
if the argument is valid for traceroute then it is also valid for
ifconfig etc. if traceroute must be moved, then so must the others.
OTOH, if the argument is not valid for ifconfig then it is not valid for
traceroute either. if ifconfig shouldn't be moved, then neither should
traceroute.
the counter-argument is that it is irrelevant whether a program CAN be
run by a user, it's status is determined by what it's primary use is.
there is also the fact that moving it will cause breakage.
and, finally, the package maintainer believes that it is an admin tool
which belongs in /usr/sbin
> So how about it? Is someone willing to claim that the FHS does not
> require traceroute be moved? How about just the argument that the FHS
> is imprecise on that question?
these claims have been made several times...and promptly ignored with
large amounts of handwaving.
this dead horse really doesn't need any more flogging.
craig
--
craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
Fabricati Diem, PVNC.
-- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch
Reply to: