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


>>>>> On Sat, 27 Mar 1999 00:24:45 -0800, Jim Lynch <jim@laney.edu> said:

 Jim> OK, so what about fsstnd? or will debian create its own file
 Jim> system standard -document-? Will it technically affect debian
 Jim> one way or the other if debian goes its own way?

 Jim> That is to say, given two scenarios in which all packages follow
 Jim> the rules of the scenario; in one case, using an external
 Jim> standard and in the other, using only part of a standard: will
 Jim> there be -technical- benefit or penalty by choosing one or the
 Jim> other?

 Jim> What if I, as admin, desire -strongly- to follow the standard?
 Jim> Am I OUT OF LUCK with debian? Or will there be a choice within
 Jim> debian? Never mind why I'd want to follow the standard, assume
 Jim> I'm one of say 500,000 admins that would like to follow an
 Jim> accepted standard.

I'd bet that after Debian switches you'd have a hard time finding the
few exceptions without foreknowledge or reading the exceptions doc.

 Jim> Should debian choose to not follow the standard all the way,
 Jim> will there be a DFHS document? If not, my opinion is going
 Jim> against a standard would be a bad thing. How do we teach debian
 Jim> admin courses in classrooms, for example?

If the FHS works the way the FSSTND worked any divergences from the
standard have to be documented and then the distribution can be
considered standard (despite a few minor differences).  (I'm sorry I
haven't given the FHS a close reading yet.)

 Jim> If teaching is irrelevent and stability due to standards is
 Jim> unimportant, why shouldn't schools choose redhat? (what a
 Jim> horrible, gross thought...)  But debian -is- going to produce
 Jim> such a document, because to not do so would leave debian without
 Jim> important documentation, a situation considered by debian to be
 Jim> a bug. No doubt it would be fixed quickly, or is already taken
 Jim> care of. That is, -if- debian cares about standards...

A standard is composed of many parts.  As far as I know Debian will
follow the FHS in most respects.  There will be a few exceptions that
should be documented.  It really should be nothing to worry about.

I've heard of two cases where Debian plans to diverge:
1) /var/spool/mail rather than /var/mail (with a symlink which should
   make everything ok).
2) dpkg's files will stay in /var/lib rather than being moved to
   /var/state.  This more a survival instinct.  Moving these files
   could be _very_ bad if not done correctly.

Are there any other divergences that have been discussed?  (Maybe we
should start making a list now.)

@James LewisMoss <dres@ioa.com>         |  Blessed Be!
@    http://www.ioa.com/~dres           |  Linux is kewl!
@"Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours." Bach

Reply to: