Re: The Kernel

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

On Thu, 22 Jan 1998, Rick Jones wrote:

> George Bonser wrote:
> > 
> > On 22 Jan 1998 john@dhh.gt.org wrote:
> > 
> > > We seem to be arguing at cross-purposes.  I understood you to say that the
> > > Core should say nothing at all about the file hierarchy.  Making the FHS
> > > part of the Core is precisely what I have been advocating.
> > > --
> > 
> > I assumed that everyone knew that any Linux Distribution was supposed to
> > conform to FHS and that it went without saying that a distribution would
> > be conformant.  WHat I was against was any additional filesystem
> > specification on our part in addition to the FHS.  In particular, I was
> > against enforcing any of Debian's policy on Core.
> > 
> > It looks like we have arguing about nothing.
> 
> You have been saying that a distro should be able to put it's files
> wherever it want's i.e. 
> 
> A quote from your previous post:
> 
> "Because they will make a call to uucico, uux, uutraf or some other
> program that DOES know where to find the stuff.  In other words, it does
> not
> matter if cnews has its configs in /var/lib/news or in /etc/news as long
> as inews and rnews work."

A distro can put them in either location.  I am not such an idiot that I
am going to think that Red Hat is going to give a rat's pair of hips about
where we THINK things should go.

Here is what is going to happen:

1) FHS is the standard for the core
2) Debian Policy is standard for the distribution at the outset.

I do not care if another distribution duplicates Debian`s policy or not.

The core specification should be one sheet of paper. All that we need to
say about filesystem layout can be said in a single sentance:

The filesystem layout must comply with the FHS.

That is all.

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.