Re: /usr/share/man
On Tue, 21 Dec 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Rob Lembree wrote:
> > This would mean that any layered, possibly licensed product
> > have its man pages potentially shared among machines in /usr/share,
> > yet the binaries wouldn't necessarily be (not that one would
> > particularly want that either!).
>
> Please note that at installationtime you generally don't know if your
> application will be shared amongst machines or not, so imho it doesn't
> make a lot of sense to write a policy about that.
>
> > Ya, that's a good argument, but I wouldn't expect to see a
> > 'mount' manpage there though.
>
> Why not? I can imagine someone using a customized mount with its own
> manpage living there..
For example: CheckPoint does use /opt/CKPfw/man for the man page. But I do
think it would be silly to have NFS on a firewall. But it wouldn't hurt to
export /usr this way.
But if the manpage should be private then the software should be as well
and installation in /usr would be ill advised. That's why the /opt tree
was created.
At present it is my opinion that Solaris is propably the most FHS
compliant systems around. But I must admit I haven't checked all the linux
distributions for their latest versions. (Just checking out SuSE 5.3 this
week for some SGML issue's.)
Hugo.
--
Hugo van der Kooij; Oranje Nassaustraat 16; 3155 VJ Maasland
hvdkooij@caiw.nl http://home.kabelfoon.nl/~hvdkooij/
--------------------------------------------------------------
Use of any of my email addresses for unsollicited (commercial)
email is a clear intrusion of my privacy and illegal!
Reply to: