> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:fhs-
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert
> Schweikert
> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 5:56 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [fhs-discuss] Presentation of FHS
> 
> On 06/27/2012 07:19 AM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Kostas Koudaras wrote on Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:54:08PM +0300:
> >
> >> I found it really interesting and to be honest untill that
> >> moment I did not knew that something like that even existed.
> >
> > Small wonder, it hardly exists.
> > It is nearly unmaintained, mostly Linux-only,
> 
> It is mostly Linux only because other OS "vendors" do not care. We
have
> gotten the cold shoulder from BSD more than once and commercial UNIX
> vendors do not care either.
> 
> > and not much respected in practice.
> 
> It is very much respected in various distributions. In OBS (Open Build
> Service) we have checks that generate errors when someone tries to
> create a package that is not FHS compliant.
> 
> >
> > There was a straw fire to revive it several months ago,
> > but interest died down again very quickly and almost completely.
> 
> Yes, we are having issues in moving 3.0 out of draft status and the
> process has taken way too long.
> 
> Robert

At some risk of being a "me, too" I would also disagree with Ingo
Schwarze's assessment. Part of the reason that things are relatively
inactive is that most of the questions one would need to ask are already
addressed. I continue to refer to it from time to time as well as
pointing others to it. I'm on the list to track changes; if I had more
time I'd be actively contributing.
_______________________________________________
fhs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/fhs-discuss

Reply via email to