Re: FHS compliance
Pierre THIERRY <firstname.lastname@example.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?