Re: libexec in glibc
ams@kemisten.nu (Alfred M. Szmidt) writes:
> tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
>
> > 1) What gets added to the FHS is not a Debian decision,
> > 2) Debian released architectures need to conform to FHS, and
> > 3) Ports still being worked on don't need to treat (2) as their top
> > priority, especially when they expect FHS will change in relevant
> > ways before the port is released.
>
> If top-level directories are allowed to be added by the people that
> make a distribution then the whole discussion is quite irrelevant.
What? The people who make a distribution (in this case) are Debian,
and Debian doesn't get to create top-level directories; which everyone
agrees.
Moreover, Debian has already decided that it *won't* create top-level
directories beyond the FHS as long as there are "other places" to put
the same things, so adding a "you can make new top level directories"
sentence to FHS wouldn't change things.
Really, we know what we're doing--that is, the "we" of the core Hurd
developers--and it's a touchy political thing that is not likely to be
helped by individuals taking it upon themselves to "sort it all out".
Reply to: