Re: hurd does NOT need /hurd

[tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)]

Adam Heath <doogie@debian.org> writes:

> On 20 May 2002, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> 
> > Adam Heath <doogie@debian.org> writes:
> >
> > > What I want to know, is why can't existing locations be used for what hurd
> > > developers want to place in /hurd.
> >
> > They can be, but they shouldn't be.
> 
> This is not a reason.  List the reasons.

I wonder if you've been paying attention.  Here are some:

* User convenience in typing pathnames.
* Transparency.
* Difference between these binaries and other binaries in their
  execution context
* Historical practice

There are more, but this is a brief list of some of the ones that have
come up with so far.

Thomas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org