Re: Is the FHS dead ?
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 05:24:24PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Reiviving the FHS is great! Something that is bothering me a bit,
> though, is that historically it seemed to try to cater to Unix in
> general, not only Linux, even if most of the participants were coming
> from the Linux world. So hosting it under the LSB auspices might deter
> other Unix vendors to consider it or get involved, which would seem like
> a regression. Maybe hosting it on a more neutral place would be better?
Well, realistically we didn't have very good participation from anyone
other than one or two *BSD folks, and at the time some of the changes
that were made for compatibility with *BSD (and, to be fair, to be
closer to the rest of the Unix world) caused no small amount of
controversy.
Consider the following thread from debian-devel approximately 8 years
ago (which was about the last time we had any *BSD participation):
http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-devel@lists.debian.org/msg11462.html
Realistically, I think we will have a hard enough time dealing with
any places where the various Linux distributions have chosen different
pathname (i.e., differences between Debian and Red Hat, or Red Hat and
Novell, et. al). If it turns out that all Linux distributions do it
one way, and OpenBSD has chosen a different hierarchy --- let's be
honest with ourselves, would we really try to engineer change at
Debian, Ubuntu, Red Hat, SLES, etc., just as a peace offerring to keep
Theo deRaadt from OpenBSD happy? I just don't see it....
And if it's not going to happen, we shouldn't try to set up
expectations that we would try to change all of Linux just because a
*BSD happened to have chosen a different pathname....
Regards,
- Ted
Reply to: