[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [bam@snoopy.apana.org.au: Re: Settle for /usr symlink (!)]

On Thu, Mar 11, 1999 at 08:46:52AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> >> This means that any Debian package which can't cope with having
> >> /usr a symlink to / breaks policy and needs to be corrected, so
> >> I guess I have already answered one of my previous questions
> >> to Marcus.
> >
> >Mmmmh. Reading a standard, I can't find this. Why does it "breaks policy"?
> >The standard says nothing about /bin and /usr/bin carrying the same file,
> >(or the same for /lib). This seems to be unspecified.
> >From memory, the Debian policy requires programs to adhere to the
> FSSTND - hence if a program won't work with FSSTND, it also breaks
> Debian policy. Please correct me if I am wrong though.

Yes, this I know. However, does the standard really require it that /usr
can be a symlink to / ? This is what I meant with my question. I think the
standard does not say anything about this, from what I read. It does nowhere
say, for example, "you must not have /bin/foo and /usr/bin/foo being
something different". It does also not say the opposite.



`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org   finger brinkmd@ 
Marcus Brinkmann              GNU    http://www.gnu.org     master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de                        for public  PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/       PGP Key ID 36E7CD09

Reply to: