Re: Filesystem Hierarchy Standard 2.0 (fwd)

[Hamish Moffatt <hamish@debian.org>]

On Tue, Nov 04, 1997 at 09:03:14PM +0100, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> what about this :
> the new to-be 2.1 distribution should be empty (not all these symlinkls
> to the old hamm tree), and only real new packages with fhs should go
> there.

I just joined this list; can somebody point me at
(a) a copy of the new FHS (which is a replacement for the FSSTND?), and
(b) a rationale for its changes.

For example, from what I've picked up so far, usr/doc is changing
to usr/share/doc. That doesn't sound a particularly worthwhile
change to me at present, so I would like to read a rationale for the changes.


thanks,
Hamish


-- 
Hamish Moffatt, StudIEAust              hamish@debian.org, hmoffatt@mail.com
Student, computer science & computer systems engineering.    3rd year, RMIT.
http://hamish.home.ml.org/ (PGP key here)             CPOM: [*****     ] 58%
The opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth.  --Bohr