[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alfred M. Szmidt) writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes: > > > 1) What gets added to the FHS is not a Debian decision, > > 2) Debian released architectures need to conform to FHS, and > > 3) Ports still being worked on don't need to treat (2) as their top > > priority, especially when they expect FHS will change in relevant > > ways before the port is released. > > If top-level directories are allowed to be added by the people that > make a distribution then the whole discussion is quite irrelevant.
What? The people who make a distribution (in this case) are Debian, and Debian doesn't get to create top-level directories; which everyone agrees. Moreover, Debian has already decided that it *won't* create top-level directories beyond the FHS as long as there are "other places" to put the same things, so adding a "you can make new top level directories" sentence to FHS wouldn't change things. Really, we know what we're doing--that is, the "we" of the core Hurd developers--and it's a touchy political thing that is not likely to be helped by individuals taking it upon themselves to "sort it all out".