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

Re: File Systems.

On Sat, 18 Mar 2000, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> > I see that, but what is the "Linux Standard Base" about then? Is it just
> > about the kernel? Obviously not. So what is that "Linux" in "Linux
> > Standard Base"? IMHO it is what the LSB specifies to be called,
> > recognized and treated as "Linux". And then, everything not embraced by
> > that specification isn't Linux but some 3rd party application and has as
> > such go to /opt if installed by a package or to /usr/local if installed
> > manually by the admin.
> No distribution vendor is ever going to embrace this philosophy.  It's
> completely needlessly restrictive.

I strongly suspect Red Hat's users would hate it if we started littering
/opt with things from our distribution. /usr is correct for packages that
come with the operating system, /opt is correct for 3rd party packages, and
/usr/local should be left alone for system administrator's use.

Let's standardize the well-accepted tenets of Linux. They've evolved for
a reason, 20 million people are comfortable with them, and it will speed
the adoption of the LSB.


|            "Who is John Galt?" - Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand		      |
|                                                                             |
|  Linux Application Development  --  http://people.redhat.com/johnsonm/lad   |

Reply to: