On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 04:26:46PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Sun, 19 May 2002, Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > > On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 01:51:57PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > Actually, I got that feeling from Jeroen's mails. That was the main reason > > > I sent this mail, not because I think or feel that the line is there. > > > > No. It's GNU/Linux on one side, the GNU system on the other side and > > BSD on the third side. Those are 3 different operating systems. Debian > > wants to be package those. It not that is one operating system. > > This is the main point where we disagree, I'm afraid. Debian is (or at > least, should be) an operating system with an exchangeable kernel. When > the first non-Linux port is released, you'll be able to run Debian on the > Linux kernel, or on the kernel in that released non-Linux port. > > Debian can not provide "the GNU system", as I said in another mail. Also, > Debian/BSD will never be the same as NetBSD (although it uses the NetBSD > kernel). It will be Debian, using a BSD kernel. Therefore, it is not wrong > to use a different file hierarchy. You miss some very important thing in your naming. It's Debian GNU/NetBSD, Debian GNU/Linux and Debian GNU(/Hurd). You see: GNU, GNU and GNU. That's why I think it would be easier for Debian to follow GNU standards. But if Debian doesn't want it, I don't care. > > And the common opinion here is that the FHS should be used for the GNU > > system. > > That is not true; the common opinion here is that the FHS should be used > for Debian. That's not the same thing. More than one developer have said to me that the problem of the Hurd port is that it wants to be different. They referred to the libexec discussion when I asked what they meant by that. They don't seem to understand that it is different and the Debian policy can't be automatically applied to it. > > I'm not going to fuck up the GNU system with the FHS, just > > because the Debian dictators think the GNU system should be exactly > > like GNU/Linux. > [...] > > Nobody's saying that. People are just saying that Debian GNU/Hurd should > be the same as Debian GNU/Linux, as much as technically possible. And that doesn't make any sense. The other way around makes more sense, because GNU/Linux is the fork of the GNU OS and GNU/Hurd is the original OS. > > I wanted to change Debian, but I walked to a wall of arrogant > > closed-minded people with no time and those people have all the power > > over Debian. > > You shouldn't change Debian. Or the Hurd. > > You should change both, so that they cooperate. Or develop "the GNU > system". That's what I want, but I'm accused of wanting to change Debian instead of trying to port the Hurd to Debian. Jeroen Dekkers -- Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org IRC ID: jeroen@openprojects GNU supporter - http://www.gnu.org
Attachment:
pgpo1IQydvPCE.pgp
Description: PGP signature