| 1 |
On Tuesday 23 September 2003 03:08 pm, Stanislav Brabec wrote: |
| 2 |
> There are other issues, too: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
<snip> |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I don't understand the logic behind blindly following a document like the FHS. |
| 7 |
If there are compelling reasons why a directory of installation path is |
| 8 |
incorrect, then it needs to be addressed. However, I can tell you that 99% |
| 9 |
of Linux users have multiple directories underneath /mnt (cdrom, hd, |
| 10 |
usbhd...). This is a violation of the FHS. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
As far as I can tell, Gentoo only doesn't comply in areas where it made more |
| 13 |
sense for us to use something different. If installing kde and qt into /opt |
| 14 |
is most important, why not symlink it there? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I guess I just fail to see the advantage of having an "FHS compliant" sticker |
| 17 |
on the proverbial box when it makes more sense to do things differently. And |
| 18 |
in some cases, it is only that way to support legacy users who are used to |
| 19 |
doing things a certain way. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I have yet to see an installation that is 100% FHS compliant. I'd say that |
| 22 |
97% is pretty darn good. :) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Caleb |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives