Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr

[Steve Greenland <steveg@moregruel.net>]

On 17-Jun-02, 21:51 (CDT), Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote: 
> 
> "It seems sloppy" is a pretty poor argument for moving every binary not
> specifically mentioned in the FHS into /usr and gratuitously breaking
> any scripts that needed them where they are.

Yes, that would be a pretty poor argument, if I had indeed suggested
doing that. But I didn't. I haven't made any suggestions about moving
anything. All I've suggested is that we list what early running code can
rely on, and a couple of different ways to get there.

> Are you sloppy when you exercise your judgement about your packages? Why
> would you expect everyone else to be?

I don't. However, we already have cases of specific developers being,
shall we say, "difficult". Not sloppy, but having very strong opinions
about how a particular thing should be done, despite a large number of
other experienced developers disagreeing.

What is the purpose of Debian Policy? I always thought it was a way to
decide/document choices, when more than one choice was reasonable, and
when that choice affected other developers and our users. This subject
falls into that definition, in my opinion.

Steve

-- 
Steve Greenland

    The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
    system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
    world.       -- seen on the net


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org