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

Re: FHS compliance

Scribit Pierre THIERRY dies 18/03/2005 hora 19:51:
> If it's a frequenty asked question, why about putting a complete and
> clean answser in the Hurd's FAQ, with pros and cons?

Here is a very quick first try for that answer:

  FHS and /hurd?

  As not being mentioned in it, /hurd might be considered not compliant
  to the FHS.

  First, even if it is not the prefered solution, nothing prevents a
  distributor from adding things in / that are not explicitly described
  in the FHS.

  Second, the two possible solutions for the translators in /hurd would
  be /sbin (and /usr/sbin, but /usr is a symlink to /) and /lib. /sbin
  is not desirable because we don't want the translators to be in the
  PATH, as they will not start in a shell (except for their --help or
  --version arguments), and /lib neither, because in other systems like
  Linux, the modules that reside here, and do the work that translators
  do, are more shared libraries.

Nowhere man
OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: