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

Re: FHS compliance

Pierre THIERRY <nowhere.man@levallois.eu.org> writes:

> Scribit Thomas Bushnell BSG dies 16/03/2005 hora 09:45:
>> > What is with /lib/hurd or /lib/servers? GNU/Linux has it modules in
>> > /lib/modules/$kernel-version, so why you do not the same for Hurd?
>> They are not libraries.
> Nor are the kernel modules in Linux... Thus, quoting the FHS:
>   ``/lib : Essential shared libraries and kernel modules''
> As the Hurd works with a µ-kernel, the Hurd servers do precisely what,
> in Linux, the loadable modules do, and they are in /lib.

Really?  When did you install GNU/Hurd to figure that all out? :)

>> We are compliant with FHS.
> It's not as evident and undoubtable as you seem to think. As far as how
> I understand the FHS, you're not. But maybe the question should be asked
> to FHS gurus, or more accurately to the FHS editors.

May I ask you why you care that much about the FHS?  I almost hate the
FHS because of all those useless discussions about it on the Hurd

Sometimes I wonder why people don't hack instead of discussing things
forever.  Is it *REALLY* that important if there are two extra
directories on GNU/Hurd?  How about /sys in GNU/Linux, etc?


Reply to: