Re: hurd does NOT need /hurd
[ Sorry for the off-topic ].
Adam Heath wrote:
> What I want to know, is why can't existing locations be used for what hurd
> developers want to place in /hurd.
AFAIK, "what hurd developers want to place in /hurd" has always been there,
so as far as GNU/Hurd is concerned, /hurd is the "existing location".
So, hurd developers are already using "existing locations".
> I want the *reasons*. And, long papers are not the answer. Short, simple,
> point by point explanations for why a *new* directory(whereever it ends up
> being) is needed.
The directory /hurd is not "new" because it is the directory that has
always been used for the purpose it's currently being used.
If you read the entire thread you will see at least a short, simple
and single-point explanation why /hurd is *currently* used, namely,
that you can write
settrans -c /mnt /hurd/ext2fs /dev/hd0s2
instead of
settrans -c /mnt /some/long/directory/several/levels/deep/ext2fs /dev/hd0s2
which is a real pain to write. If you have never used the settrans
command, then this is obviously irrelevant for you, but our priorities,
you know, are our users and free software, and Debian GNU/Hurd users
are also our users.
The border between what we need and what is useful is not an absolute one.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: