Theodore Tso writes (Re: Is the FHS dead ?):
Well, the last time we tried to make reasonable accomodations for
*BSD's, some of the biggest biggest whiners^H^H^H^H^H^H^H complaints
came from Debian. In fact, some later complaints from Debianites
about the lack of /usr/libexec is largely
On 2/24/09, Theodore Tso ty...@mit.edu wrote:
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 08:20:31AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Interesting. And yes, illustrative of the historically (and, should I
add, ridiculous? No, I'd better not ;-) ) rivality between Linux and
the *BSDs, big egos included.
Well,
Russ Allbery wrote:
Luke L lukehasnon...@gmail.com writes:
Something to think about: Shouldn't SQL databases and web servers, and
file servers, be under /srv/? /srv/www, /srv/mysql, /srv/smb, etc.?
The current FHS reserves /srv's namespace for the local administrator. My
guess is that
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Giacomo A. Catenazzi c...@debian.org wrote:
Russ Allbery wrote:
Luke L lukehasnon...@gmail.com writes:
Something to think about: Shouldn't SQL databases and web servers, and
file servers, be under /srv/? /srv/www, /srv/mysql, /srv/smb, etc.?
The current
Giacomo Catenazzi c...@cateee.net writes:
Standards should be most frozen as possible. I don't find a lot of
think that need to be added.
What about cross compile and multiarch paths?
The old lib32/lib64 dirs currently mentioned in the FHS are just not
covering enough cases and are misleading
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 4:14 AM, Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote:
Hi,
I wanted to discuss the python-support directory tree location (and
similar issues) with the FHS maintainers, however it occurred to me that
the mailing list is completely dead, and the standard doesn’t seem very
Theodore Tso dijo [Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:57:32PM -0500]:
Well, realistically we didn't have very good participation from anyone
other than one or two *BSD folks, and at the time some of the changes
that were made for compatibility with *BSD (and, to be fair, to be
closer to the rest of the
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:46 PM, Luke L lukehasnon...@gmail.com wrote:
Something to think about: Shouldn't SQL databases and web servers, and
file servers, be under /srv/? /srv/www, /srv/mysql, /srv/smb, etc.?
The bikeshed shall be coloured 'yes'.
--
bye,
pabs
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 08:20:31AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Interesting. And yes, illustrative of the historically (and, should I
add, ridiculous? No, I'd better not ;-) ) rivality between Linux and
the *BSDs, big egos included.
Well, the last time we tried to make reasonable accomodations
Luke L lukehasnon...@gmail.com writes:
Something to think about: Shouldn't SQL databases and web servers, and
file servers, be under /srv/? /srv/www, /srv/mysql, /srv/smb, etc.?
The current FHS reserves /srv's namespace for the local administrator. My
guess is that people won't want to go
Ben Finney wrote:
Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org writes:
Reiviving the FHS is great! Something that is bothering me a bit,
though, is that historically it seemed to try to cater to Unix in
general, not only Linux, even if most of the participants were
coming from the Linux world.
What
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 05:24:24PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
Reiviving the FHS is great! Something that is bothering me a bit,
though, is that historically it seemed to try to cater to Unix in
general, not only Linux, even if most of the participants were coming
from the Linux world. So
Le mercredi 18 février 2009 à 20:48 -0500, Theodore Tso a écrit :
So the plan is FHS will be updated in the context of the LSB
workgroup, since the FHS mailing list has largely been taken over by
SPAM, and it seemed that most of the people who were interested in it
were active LSB work group
Hi!
On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 20:48:06 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 06:08:17PM +0200, Teodor wrote:
There is no need to create another standard, FHS is being continued in
the LSB project at linuxfoundation.org / freestandards.org. FHS was
the starting point for LSB.
On 02/19/2009 09:24 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
[snip]
Reiviving the FHS is great! Something that is bothering me a bit,
though, is that historically it seemed to try to cater to Unix in
general, not only Linux, even if most of the participants were coming
from the Linux world. So hosting it under
Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org writes:
Reiviving the FHS is great! Something that is bothering me a bit,
though, is that historically it seemed to try to cater to Unix in
general, not only Linux, even if most of the participants were
coming from the Linux world.
What reference do you have
On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 09:32:43 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org writes:
Reiviving the FHS is great! Something that is bothering me a bit,
though, is that historically it seemed to try to cater to Unix in
general, not only Linux, even if most of the participants were
Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org writes:
On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 09:32:43 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
What reference do you have for [a Unix-wide scope for the FHS]? My
recollection of the FHS purpose from its inception was that it was
limited to GNU/Linux, just as now.
For example:
Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mardi 17 février 2009 à 07:41 +0100, Giacomo Catenazzi a écrit :
Also for cgroups, I really hope that proposal come from distributions
(and common usage). Only after one distribution use it, it need to
be standardized. IMHO standards should come from bottom.
I’m
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 06:08:17PM +0200, Teodor wrote:
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote:
Le lundi 16 février 2009 à 14:20 +, Matthew Johnson a écrit :
the FHS should certainly continue to exist and be coordinated between
distros though. I agree
Le mardi 17 février 2009 à 07:41 +0100, Giacomo Catenazzi a écrit :
Currently, the discussion is clearly happening at other levels. If you
look at the recent cgroups discussion for example, it will clearly be
decided at the distribution level, without any kind of standardization.
Is not
Hi,
I wanted to discuss the python-support directory tree location (and
similar issues) with the FHS maintainers, however it occurred to me that
the mailing list is completely dead, and the standard doesn’t seem very
alive either. The last release was 5 years ago, and is starting to look
slightly
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 11:14:52AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
I wanted to discuss the python-support directory tree location (and
similar issues) with the FHS maintainers, however it occurred to me that
the mailing list is completely dead, and the standard doesn’t seem very
alive
On Mon Feb 16 13:14, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
Is there a standards body still interested in moving forward with
filesystem layout discussions? If not, shouldn’t we start our own
standard?
I'm not sure if start our own standard is a good idea. We already have
our own standards and the
On 02/16/2009 04:14 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Hi,
I wanted to discuss the python-support directory tree location (and
similar issues) with the FHS maintainers, however it occurred to me that
the mailing list is completely dead, and the standard doesn’t seem very
alive either. The last release
Le lundi 16 février 2009 à 14:20 +, Matthew Johnson a écrit :
the FHS should certainly continue to exist and be coordinated between
distros though. I agree that if it needs taking over we should do so in
cooperation with the other big distros.
Certainly. It’s just that someone needs to
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote:
Le lundi 16 février 2009 à 14:20 +, Matthew Johnson a écrit :
the FHS should certainly continue to exist and be coordinated between
distros though. I agree that if it needs taking over we should do so in
cooperation
Le lundi 16 février 2009 à 18:08 +0200, Teodor a écrit :
There is no need to create another standard, FHS is being continued in
the LSB project at linuxfoundation.org / freestandards.org. FHS was
the starting point for LSB.
Even if the LSB project has been criticized by the Debian project,
Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le lundi 16 février 2009 à 18:08 +0200, Teodor a écrit :
There is no need to create another standard, FHS is being continued in
the LSB project at linuxfoundation.org / freestandards.org. FHS was
the starting point for LSB.
Even if the LSB project has been criticized
29 matches
Mail list logo
