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

Re: Filesystem standards (was Re: Pcomm and term)

> How extensively have you tested it? I ask because I know a lot of people 
> who had no problems compiling, but have been unable to get it working
> with any degree of stability.

Term 1.12 at 19200 with trsh and tupload work fine.  I have some
problems with the speed of txconn. It is very slow to get an app over
the line (took almost a minute I think), but I am not sure how fast
people expect the connection to be.  For instance, it took awhile to
get Emacs over the line, but once here there was only a slight delay
in typing.  I would venture that the compile was ok.  A note, I do not
run with a termrc.

> Also, before people begin throwing together binary packages, we need to
> establish a hierarchy for optional packages that everybody agrees on. Then
> we (as package maintainers) need to determine if our particular package
> is 'base' or 'system' software or strictly optional software and then build 
> our respective packages accordingly. There is a crazy debate on linux-FSSTND 
> about this stuff right now and I urge all package developers to follow it.

The debate looks far from over, so the problem is we either have to
decide now, and be willing to change when fsstnd decides, or we wait.
Unless they decided soon we are in a quandary.  Any comment Daniel

> I believe the current concensus is that the /usr/local hierarchy is strictly
> for locally written and installed software only, i.e. not the place to put
> optional debian packages like term. Whether it should go in /usr/* or
> /usr/opt/* or /usr/contrib/* needs to be decided still.

Yup.  That is why I compiled it to go into /usr/{bin,man}. Problem
again is that there is no standard yet for add-ons like kermit or term
besides /usr (where kermit was placed).


Reply to: