Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
- To: Alan Cox <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Cc: email@example.com (Gordon Tetlow), firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
- From: Daniel Quinlan <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 10:58:36 -0800
- Message-id: <199901251858.KAA15041@sodium.transmeta.com>
- Reply-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <199901251720.RAA11006@snowcrash.cymru.net>
- References: <36A74C1D.7B3AB1C8@vanderbilt.edu> <199901251720.RAA11006@snowcrash.cymru.net>
Alan Cox <email@example.com> writes:
> If all the vendors think /var/mail is stupid then its perhaps time
> for the FHS to ask "ok why.. is there a problem, did we make a bad
> choice, or did we simply fail to explain the reasons /var/mail is
Well, I've been told that Debian, Red Hat, SuSE, PHT, and Caldera are
all still using /var/spool/mail. This may be because most
distributions haven't completely updated for FHS 2.0. Of course, that
might be due to the /var/spool/mail change.
The only software (that I know of) that has switched over to /var/mail
I am leaning towards backing out the change in FHS 2.1. I think it's
a small long-term loss, and definitely a cop-out, but my hope is that
now there will be a more serious review of FHS 2.1 by distributions
before it is released.
The one thing I think people have forgotten is that FHS is not just
trying to codify current practice. If that was the case, we'd all
still be using /etc for system binaries, there wouldn't be a standard
directory for many things (like log files and documentation), we'd
still use /usr/man/cat? for performatted manual pages, etc.
Before reverting to /var/spool/mail, the practical question to ask
If we explicitly allow /var/mail to be a symbolic link to
/var/spool/mail (or whereever), will you *consider* changing
programs to reference /var/mail instead of /var/spool/mail?
Upgraded systems would not need to have their mount point changed,
and old programs that reference /var/spool/mail would be okay for
New systems would need to have a /var/spool/mail -> /var/mail symbolic
link for about two years.