On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 01:53:24PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 10:22:03AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi> writes: > > > On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 09:25:19AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > >> Also, FHS development seems to be effectively dead. We're already > > >> carrying a fairly large collection of exceptions. One more wouldn't > > >> make a tremendous difference as long as there's no major user behavior > > >> change, and the symlinks would take care of that. > > > There may be hope of an FHS revival: > > > http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/lsb/fhs > > > I haven't followed if they're actually doing any work. > > I've been on the mailing list, and so far it's mostly been crickets. The > > person who was driving the effort has been busy with other LSB work. > While that's true, there is now a framework for getting changes made to the > FHS again - unlike before when the only three editors with commit access > were all AWOL. The FHS and the guarantees it provides about what users can > expect from their system is still important. If Debian thinks we need to > diverge from the FHS on something as major as the existence of /sbin, that's > a conversation we should be having in the FHS WG first before implementing > it. As an aside, I've learned by way of said mailing list that Fedora took it upon themselves to deviate from the FHS by eliminating /usr/games, which is a terrible thing because it now means insecure game software, much of it sgid, is on root's path when it shouldn't be. :-P I think that's a great example of why distros shouldn't diverge from the FHS in isolation now that there is a functional forum for discussing changes. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature