Re: hurd does NOT need /hurd
Emile van Bergen <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Agreed. It's just a pity that the FHS will probably soon have added
> /hurd without anybody ever having thought about some good, *general*
> criteria when to add separate directories for binaries, which really
> could have been worthwile for reasons also brought up by Alfred, and
> that we've learned nothing new, just formalised existing practice for a
> single upstream OS.
What makes you think that Debian is the group who should be telling
FHS what the "good general criteria" are to be?
The fact that it is not on topic for this mailing list does not mean
it isn't on topic anywhere.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org