Including the FHS in debian-policy (Was: Bug#29408)
I submitted the following bug report a while ago, and Manoj has just
closed it as we have not yet agreed to go with the FHS.
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 2.5.0.0
>
> This package still bundles the Linux Filesystem Standard Version 1.2.
> However, a check at tsx-11.mit.edu showed that version 2.0 was
> released about a year ago. This should probably be included in the
> next release of the package.
My questions are:
(1) Are we intending to move towards following the FHS?
There is a lot of evidence that this is the case. Firstly,
several packages are starting to move their files to the
FHS-specified locations, even though these are in contravention of
the locations specified in FSSTND 1.2. A good example is that the
tetex-* packages and many dependent packages have moved their data
files to /usr/share/texmf in the latest potato versions even
though the FSSTND requires /usr/lib/texmf.
If we decide to do so, then I believe that we should make this
clear as soon as possible and suggest a plan of action, as this
will require recompilation of every package (especially given the
/usr/doc -> /usr/share/doc move). [This will probably be fairly
easy for debhelper-dependent builds, as a trivial change in
dh_install* will make the required changes happen automatically.]
To decide this close to the freeze will be asking for a disaster
and severly delayed freeze, IMHO.
If we are, do we need a vote etc. on this issue?
(2) If we are, can we please add the FHS to the debian-policy package,
along with some indication (although probably not yet in the
policy itself) of these intentions.
(3) If we are not, which would seem strange, how are we going to deal
with the current mess, which is neither FSSTND nor FHS compliant?
Julian
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk
Debian GNU/Linux Developer. jdg@debian.org
-*- Finger jdg@master.debian.org for my PGP public key. -*-
Reply to: