Using hamm? READ THIS about /usr/spool and related links...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hello.
This mail is intended for the user who is running the current Debian
unstable distribution (a.k.a. hamm).
I'm the Debian maintainer who removed the /usr/spool symlink and some
other symlinks that were part of the `base-files' package...
Not only the FHS but also the old FSSTND says that the mail spool is
/var/spool/mail, so every program should look for mail there, not
in /usr/spool/mail.
Everything that the FSSTND and the FHS says about the symlink
/usr/spool -> /var/spool is that it "may be present" (but it is not
mandatory).
It also says "Once a system no longer requires any one of the above
symbolic links, the link may be removed, if desired."
Well, our goal for Debian 2.0 is obviously to comply with the standards,
so we *must* modify all our software to use /var/spool and not /usr/spool.
But then: How will we know which programs do not use /var/spool yet?
The answer is very simple: Just remove the symlinks and see which programs
break. Of course, this has to be done in *unstable*, where every
program may break.
So if a program breaks because it uses /usr/spool, *that* is a bug.
If you want to help us on this, you may report all those bugs through the
Debian bug tracking system, see /usr/doc/debian/bug-reporting.txt or
http://www.de.debian.org/Bugs.
[ Of course, if you want to help us even more, you may take a look at
the bug database first to make sure that the bug is not already reported ].
As it is often said: I apologize for the inconvenience, etc. etc.
Thanks.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: latin1
iQCVAgUBNODHCiqK7IlOjMLFAQEfDAQApFmgt81FUwk0e791lu7cTxVvb7NS0KwP
PFGEK6noWEboVFIWFqNpmnQdTNDikwHi2YyQlF9Ak4WpbQy+tGzfeUc9/+cxfeTD
Pli5Oe71dusZ2zQkhu0k9+mwq7wXFnFdEO2ZPUoaTUfcnijz4qCs6dz5sJaKyn3n
WSbvLPuxZrg=
=0KN/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: