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

Other FHS issues (was Re: /usr/share/doc: some new proposals)



Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:

> Hi,
> >>"Chris" == Chris Waters <xtifr@dsp.net> writes:

>  Chris> There is more involved with FHS than I think many people
>  Chris> realize.  We have a fair amount of work to do just with the
>  Chris> stuff that is obvious *and* non-contentious, like
>  Chris> /usr/share/man and /usr/share/info.  I

>         That is already policy.

Yes, I understand.  That doesn't make it any less work.

>  Chris> haven't heard *anyone* discuss the move from /var/lib/games to
>  Chris> /var/games either, which is going to require a bit of work.

>         What is wrong with individual packages moving to /var/games as
>   part of FHS compliance? What are the problems you envisage?

It's not just a matter of moving the files in the package.  This is
like the /var/state transition (which we're not doing) -- these are
variable data files (e.g. hi-score files).  They have to be moved
manually, and programs have to be compiled to use the new location.

Moving to /usr/share/man or /usr/share/doc isn't going to involve
patching any code in the packages that move.  Moving /var/lib/games to
/var/games is going to involve patching the code and writing or
modifying postinst/postrm files for *every* package involved.

(If you have an easier solution, I am ALL EARS, because, as you may
have guessed, this does affect packages of mine.)

>  Chris> Potato is *not* going to be FHS compliant, so why pretend?

>         I think you are labouring under a misapprehension here. No one
>  is saying that potato shall be FHS compliant.

I could swear that a couple of people *DID* say exactly that -- that
if we fix debhelper and whatever the other tool is, we'll only have a
handful of packages left to fix.  Obviously, you and *I* know this is
pretty darned unlikely to happen by Potato's release! :-)

> We would be hard put to make woody compliant, I think, if we start
> now.

I think we have a very good shot at it even if we wait a little.
We've rebuilt nearly every darn package in the system for the last
couple of releases, why should Woody be different?  :-)

>  Chris> The /usr/doc issue is big, but it's simple and consistent, and
>  Chris> will yield to brute force measures *somehow*.  Let's make sure
>  Chris> we have the more subtle, inobvious, and tricky bits under
>  Chris> control before worrying about it.

>         Which are?

Well, I'd read the FHS fairly carefully a couple of times before I
even *noticed* the move of /var/lib/games to /var/games, just as an
off-the-top-of-my-head example.  Who knows how many other subtle
little things like this are lurking unnoticed?

-- 
Chris Waters   xtifr@dsp.net | I have a truly elegant proof of the
      or    xtifr@debian.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr     | this .signature file.


Reply to: