* Laszlo (Laca) Peter <laca at sun.com> [2006-05-01 10:17]: > On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 07:39 -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > Jeremy Teo wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > I've been following this thread from some time and I would just like > > > to clarify the following: > > > > > > 1. What is the key difference between /usr/sfw, /usr/gnu, and the > > > Companion CD? > > > > > >> From what I understand: > > > > > > /usr/sfw: A mistake, and now everything that is stable should be moved > > > into /usr > > > > Everything that doesn't have the same name as an existing thing in /usr > > should be moved. > > So shouldn't everything in /usr/sfw that has the same name as an > existing thing in /usr be moved to /usr/gnu (after officially > defining it) or shouldn't we just redefine the role of /usr/sfw > and not create /usr/gnu?
Although I normally like to reuse stuff, I think we should introduce /usr/gnu as a precise way of identifying the "alternative commands environment" it represents. The future of /usr/sfw is governed more by the case Bart wrote last year, which I believe is proposing its long term emptying (but I haven't checked on any of the interface stabilities involved; if there's an Evolving or Stable (!) /usr/sfw/bin/foo, then we're going to have a symbolic link there for a while...). - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/
