> If this were an actual ARC review, the attention signal you just heard > would have been followed by news and other official information. ;-}
So noted. :-) > I'd say that prepending (or even appending) /usr/gnu/bin likely > doesn't make sense. Well, appending makes no sense since as you point out, all of the components under /usr/gnu/bin would be superseded by those under /usr/bin. > The point of /usr/gnu/bin is (like /usr/xpg4/bin and /usr/ucb) to > allow the user to compose a layered environment (atop /usr/bin) that > is "like" some non-native environment. Moreover, the rules for > /usr/gnu/bin _already_ say that the utilities are expected to be in > /usr/bin as well -- preferably under their original names, unless > there are conflicts. > > If the reference distribution is to adopt some other design center, > then we need to explore the idea of making that become the *new* > native environment. Simply tossing /usr/gnu/bin onto the front of the > list backs us into an architectural change that needs to be more > carefully planned rather than just "happening." Indeed and if we had more time for this preview, it's likely that we would have done more towards building that new native environment. At least, that was is and still is my intention. However, time was short given the schedule that was proposed and with that constraint, I proposed this as an interim step to enable getting some feedback on the components themselves. I expect a much more integrated approach for the next preview release this project puts out. dsc
