Re: HURD/Linux/BSD* ... Loosing focus.
On Mon, 2002-05-20 at 15:53, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 03:09:04PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > Arguments for /proc are exactly like arguments for /hurd, with one
> > difference: Linux has had political pull and historic precedent to get
> > its exceptions canonized; HURD, as an unreleased OS, has not.
>
> In the specific case of /proc, moving it would break compatability with
> a large installed base, as well as all other linux distributions, so
> there would have to be a very compelling reason to do so.
So if /proc is allowed for compatibility reasons, why is libexec not so
allowed?
> > So, the proper question is not whether there is a technical reason to
> > change the Linux-biased standard.
>
> Now you're engaging in gratuitous FUD with the very term "linux-biased
> standard."
I was under the impression that this was a matter of historical fact.
Was the FHS not the successor of the old Linux FSSTND? Wasn't the FHS
only an expansion of the original FSSTND mandate - to write a Linux
filesystem standard?
I'm also amused that the thought of a Linux bias engenders such fear,
uncertainty, and doubt in you. If there is such a bias, and if it turns
out to be a problem, isn't it a lot better to acknowledge it and fix it,
rather than hide under the bed?
> (Hint: the fact that there is a linux-specific
> section hardly precludes the inclusion of a hurd-specific section at
> such time as one is written and offered for inclusion.)
Indeed, I see no such sections for any OS other than Linux. Is that
evidence of a bias? I think so.
I'm glad you agree with me that such a bias is correctable, and should
be corrected once the HURD people are ready to propose some corrections.
> Instead of the hand-wringing, could you provide some concrete examples
> of cases where the Debian organization has forced hurd to abandon a
> technical enhancement, so we could discuss some factual material?
Sure.
"HURD doesn't need /hurd, and should learn to get along without it."
Though I'd rather not discuss it again, as it seems that everyone is now
willing to let the HURD do whatever they need to do now and make their
proposals for changes to the standard once they are clear on what they
need.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: