Re: The Kernel

[George Bonser <grep@oriole.sbay.org>]

On Thu, 22 Jan 1998, William T Wilson wrote:

> This is not exactly the same thing.  The filesystem layout is a valid part
> of the core, that is the whole reason why there is a FSSTND in the first
> place.  It is important for a developer to know where to put his files. 

Most put hooks in the Makefile to specify a destination. Many simlpy
compile their binary in the src directory and allow the user to move the
binary to where they will. 

The FSSTD is basicly dead.  I forget the name of the new document but in
any case, distributors are going to do what they want. We can SUGGEST a
standard and offer packages that will install within that standard but we
should not alienate those who feel they have too much invested in their
current format to change abruptly to our layout. We must allow them a way
to migrate gradually. To see the sense of what we are doing and adopt it
as it dawns on them that it is "a good thing". In the meantime, they can
still claim SEUL 0.0.1 compliance.  

If we make a minimum standard that is easy for developers and distributors
to comply with, and make sure that our upgrades are in some sane fashion
... minor numbers are backwards compatable ... major numbers are not. We
will win over a LOT of end users and developers.  It provides both of them
with a certian security.

Good night all.



> But the packaging format, which is irrelevant to both end-users, and
> developers, is not a valid part of the core, and impinges on the
> distributor's right to distribute and install his system his own way, and
> to add functionality to his system through enhanced package management.

Right. 

George Bonser 
If NT is the answer, you didn't understand the question. (NOTE: Stolen sig)
http://www.debian.org
Debian/GNU Linux ... the maintainable operating system.