Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
- To: quinlan@transmeta.com
- Cc: Alan Cox <alan@cymru.net>, gordon.m.tetlow@vanderbilt.edu, florian@suse.de, hpa@transmeta.com, quinlan@transmeta.com, ewt@redhat.com, fhs-discuss@ucsd.edu, ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org, lsb-test@linuxbase.org, lsb-spec@linuxbase.org, lsb-spec@lists.linuxbase.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
- From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 18:09:01 -0500 (EST)
- Message-id: <[🔎] 199901252309.SAA02711@dcl>
- In-reply-to: Daniel Quinlan's message of Mon, 25 Jan 1999 10:58:36 -0800, <[🔎] 199901251858.KAA15041@sodium.transmeta.com>
I keep hearing people claim that distribution folks are saying "ick",
but I haven't heard any technical reasons besides, "Moving spool
directories is hard". When I and others have pointed out that moving
the spool directory isn't required; just a symlink, I have heard dead
silence. So the lack of technical discussion, but just a stony-silence
"No!" is rather disappointing as far as I'm concerned.
I think we should require that new applications use /var/mail, and that
backwards compatibility symlinks should exist.
If we must back out /var/mail (for no good technical reason that I can
determine), then at the very least I think we should state that there
that for all compliant distributions, /var/mail *MUST* be a valid way of
reaching the spool directory (i.e., there should be a symlink there, or
where the spool directory actually lives) and that it be permissible for
applications to use /var/mail to find the mail directory (but that
applications that want to keep using /var/spool/mail would not be
considered obsolete).
At least that way applications that want to use the same dirctory as the
vast majority of other Unix systems will work without needing a special
case for Linux. However, I would much rather see us adopt the full,
correct solution, rather than this half-measure.
- Ted
Reply to: