Re: /usr/local policy
* Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> [000229 00:33]:
> Steve> Well, let's assume that I'm reading too much into this, and that the
> Steve> Policy writers really intended that Debian be fully FHS compliant.
> So the intent was that we shall try to be as compliant as
> possible, without chaining ourselves the what is an evolving
> standard.
If we wish Debian to be compliant with the FSB (is that right? The
"lowest common denominator linux that companies can write software for")
don't we need to follow the FHS pretty closely? Perhaps extra
directories in /usr/local are no big deal.
Keep in mind though, Steve posted this not out of some higher moral
purpose, but because some poor user's /usr/local was deleted by a script
somewhere. Maybe that script is non-compliant with Debian policy, but
then maybe it is compliant. And, if that script complies with Debian
policy, I think both policy and the script should change, so our users'
/usr/local directories do not get deleted.
$0.02. Flames welcome. Thoughful replies preferred. :) ObDisclaimer:
IANADD(Y).
:)
--
Seth Arnold | http://www.willamette.edu/~sarnold/
Hate spam? See http://maps.vix.com/rbl/ for help
Reply to: