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

Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0

[ I added the FHS and debian-devel mailing lists to the Cc list, so
  a huge number of people are now being Cc'ed -- sorry. ]

Florian La Roche <florian@suse.de> writes:

>> So if there are no other bigger standards that would make it very
>> convenient to move all Linux-distributions to /var/mail and
>> abandon /var/spool/mail, I'd hope that /var/spool/mail will be
>> listed as de-facto-standard of Linux systems.

Erik Troan <ewt@redhat.com> writes:

> I would *much* prefer this, I just didn't think I'd be able to win
> the argument.

Since this is "the objection that won't die", I'm currently
considering four "ways out" of the mess created by this change that
went into FHS 2.0.

 1. totally revert, drop /var/mail, and specify /var/spool/mail
 2. partially revert, /var/spool/mail is a directory and /var/mail
    must be a symbolic link to it
 3. allow a /var/spool/mail directory, provided that /var/mail is
    a symbolic link to it
 4. allow either /var/spool/mail or /var/mail to be a directory,
    provided that the other is a symbolic link to it.

I'm personally most in favor of #2 or #3.  I think #1 is almost as bad
as the original change in FHS 2.0 and #4 is potentially confusing.  No
matter what, FHS 2.1 will specify at least #3, if not one of the other

And for each possibility _PATH_MAILDIR is changed to reflect the
actual directory, not the symbolic link.

- Dan

Reply to: