Re: multi-platform, FSSTND compliance, and /usr/share/
Will Lowe writes:
> On Fri, 30 Jan 1998, Yann Dirson wrote:
>
> > [6.3] "The directory /usr/share typically contains
> > architecture-independent files such as man-pages, timezone, terminfo
> > information, etc."
> [...]
> > As of this time, with Debian going multiplatform, it seems we should
> > push towards using /usr/share where this makes sense, as soon as
> > possible (maybe for 2.0). This will make integrating "heterogeneous"
> The move to the new FSSTND (I don't remember the new acronym) was put off
> until Debian 2.1 because it requires us to move /var/lib/dpkg/* and make a
> few other corrections that are going to be absolutely a wreck. The move
> to glibc is screwy enough on its own that we need to get it finished 'fore
> we play with too many other things ... :)
I don't think it would be so much work. A new paragraph in the policy
could be written, recommending the use of /usr/share/, while still
using symlinks to not break everything, for now. Then, full FHS
implementation will be left for 2.1, I didn't suggest to start out the
whole mess at once.
But if, say, FHS prohibits /usr/share/, then I'll shut up at once, as
it won't lead us anywhere to push towards an already obsolete (part
of) file hierarchy.
> > [6.3] "no program should ever reference anything in /usr/share."
> No clue. Might be becase /usr/share could be shared across different
> architectures (hence the name) and therefore isn't likely to reside on a
> local disk in an NFS environment, so references to a filesystem that
> might not be around could be bad.
Hmmm... what good will it bring to refer to, say, /usr/man/ if the
latter is a link to /usr/share/man/, with /usr/share/ being
NFS-mounted ?
--
Yann Dirson <ydirson@a2points.com> | Stop making M$-Bill richer & richer,
alt-email: <dirson@univ-mlv.fr> | support Debian GNU/Linux:
debian-email: <dirson@debian.org> | more powerful, more stable !
http://www.a2points.com/homepage/3475232 | Check <http://www.debian.org/>
Reply to: