| 1 |
On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 11:07:12PM -0500, in <49728.141.166.184.215.1075954032.squirrel@×××××××××××××××××××.edu>, Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> John Nilsson <john@×××××××.nu> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Am I wrong in assuming that the people responsible for FHS has already |
| 4 |
> > had this discussion? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Fortunately we don't blindly follow the lead of others, but instead we |
| 7 |
> think for ourselves. While their discussion is useful as a reference, we |
| 8 |
> need to agree with their decision before implementing it. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Absolutely! Let us discuss this. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
But better would have been for us to discuss this when the folks at |
| 13 |
freestandards.org were discussing it. If it's such a bad idea, then |
| 14 |
maybe it should have been kept out of the standard. This is one of those |
| 15 |
"voice your opinion when it counts" sort of things. Gentoo Linux aims |
| 16 |
toward LSB (and therefore FHS) compliance. There is a difference between |
| 17 |
"deferring decision-making to others" and "blindly following the lead of |
| 18 |
others". Perhaps, though, Gentoo could join some of these working groups |
| 19 |
and open a few `liaison' projects thereto. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Personally, I'm in favor of </srv>. Users need home directories, be they |
| 22 |
humans or daemons. Humans can logon to other machines. Ergo, </home> is |
| 23 |
shareable. Daemons cannot logon to other machines. Ergo, </srv> is not |
| 24 |
sharable. It may not have a great deal of precedent, but it's a good |
| 25 |
idea. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"? |
| 29 |
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action. |
| 30 |
--Ghost in the Shell |
Archives