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

Re: Resolving policy and practice wrt sbin directories (traceroute)

On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 06:49:51PM -0400, Rene Weber wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 05:43:38AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Find some perspective, and worry about something that actually matters
> > instead? This ain't the end of the world, it ain't the camel's straw,
> > and it ain't the ladder leading towards a slippery-dip.
>     I respect your sentiment, but I find it lacking.  Arguably, my
> maintenance of a non-free game and two admittedly minor tools does not
> actually matter either (that is, they do not have a major impact on the
> distribution).  Does this mean that I should resign from the project?

No, it means you should worry about improving those packages rather than
writing long screeds on the subject. The maintainer of the package has
already said what the deal is: traceroute is where it is because that's
where it is on every other UNIX, and by trying to insist that it should go
somewhere else, the FHS is being stupid.

End of story. Enough said.

If you find not having traceroute in your PATH by default annoying enough,
make a symlink in /usr/local/bin, add /usr/sbin to your PATH or make a package
that depends on traceroute and does nothing but provide the symlink. This
isn't an issue for policy, nor for debate.

Technical excellence is more important than policy compliance, btw, in all
cases. Fortunately, they only very rarely conflict.


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
  do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
                      -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)

Attachment: pgpu_Uo0KA3WF.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: