On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:33:06PM +0200, Axel Beckert wrote: > Policy 9.1.1 states: "The location of all installed files and > directories must comply with the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) > [...]". > IMHO this should not only cover "installed files" (which I interpret > as "files being shipped in packages") I think this is a wrong interpretation. There's nothing in policy that defines "installed files" the way you've interpreted it here, and I've seen no evidence of confusion on this point on the part of package maintainers up to now - we clearly have a distribution which complies with the FHS for both files shipped in packages and files generated by packages. I also think that all of the suggested wording changes in this bug are worse than what we currently have, because they make the language much less clear. So I would rather see this bug closed as wontfix than see any of the proposed patches applied. > On the other hand, local debian packages for propritary software generated > by scripts shipped in a Debian package do not need to comply to the FHS. Why do you think they don't need to comply with the FHS? Note of course that "comply with the FHS" does not mean "install to /usr". > It is not clear where to draw the line between these extremes, for > example, would a script that installs a software to a non-standard > location (e.g., because upstream has weird opinions about such things) > after asking the user to confirm this be allowed in Debian? It would probably be allowed. However, it would still be buggy under Policy. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature