Re: hurd does NOT need /hurd
On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 12:30:20AM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote:
> But I have a lot more trouble accepting false arguments, stated in a bit
> arrogant, matter of fact way, backed up by little else but tradition and
> personal authority.
>
> I'm mostly trying to provoke a line of thought that may come up with
> *sound* reasons for Debian to add /hurd (but not other extra directories
> containing particular types of binaries), or *the* general criteria when
> you *do* add a different directory to / or /usr, or a *good* way to
> categorize binaries. That's all.
Adam Heath has tried to make it look like we had no reasons for the way we
do it, and he failed. The reasons are all there, I have elaborated on them
in what? several dozen mails? They might not be the answer you want, but it
is the only answer you are going to get, regardless how often you repeat
your arguments.
And don't forget: This is not the appropriate forum for the discussion.
Thanks,
Marcus
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org brinkmd@debian.org
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org marcus@gnu.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: