Re: lsbdev and FHS (was: "Specification v 0.8")
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, Johannes Poehlmann wrote:
This has nothing to do with the files being vital or not. The
directory /usr/lsb is not listed in FHS until 2.2-beta, and this same
standard cleary forbid any other hierarchy under /usr. Of course it
can be standardized in 2.3 but for now IMO the lsbdev package is not
FHS (and thus not LSB) compliant.
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 10:50:00PM -0300, Flavio Veloso wrote:
> > Hi all.
> >
> > After installing the lsbdev package I noticed that link libraries are
> > being installed in /usr/lsb/lib. Isn't it violating the FHS (and thus
> > the LSB itself) which doesn't mention /usr/lsb and also clearly states
> > that "large software packages must not use a direct subdirectory under
> > the /usr hierarchy"?
>
> Hi Flavio, I do not see a problem here.
>
> LSB libraries are a vital part of a distribution and not a (3rd party)
> "software package". So I think it is perfectly legal to have a
> /usr/lsb/lib directory.
--
Flávio
Reply to: