Re: FHS reqts on Applications

[Andrew Josey <ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org>]

All

Thanks. Based on what I have heard  it seems the best we could do at the
moment is to advise applications to follow the FHS 2.2 but not strictly
require it. In the draft certification program we are building we have
drafted questions in the conformance statement for application writers
to state whether they follow the FHS.  Deviences should thus be allowed.

I would thus suggest we use the keyword "should" in the spec, as in

"Applications should follow the FHS 2.2."

>From the terminology section:

Should:

For an application, describes a feature or behavior that is recommended
programming practice for optimum portability.

This is thus not a requirement, but a recommendation and
give us the leeway needed.
regards
Andrew


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to lsb-spec-request@lists.linuxbase.org
with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email listmaster@lists.linuxbase.org