* James Carlson <james.d.carlson at sun.com> [2007-01-24 09:13]: > The contention by the project team seems to be that objects that are > free software but aren't exactly GNU will still go in /usr/gnu. > Though perhaps defensible, that seems a bit strange, and is leading to > a number of questions. > > I *think* the problem is with the definition of /usr/gnu. Is it > really "stuff you'd expect to see in /usr/bin on a Linux system, but > that can't be right there on Solaris because it'd wipe out something > we already have?"
The /usr/gnu definition is as precise as I could make it: it's the set of software on the FSF/UNESCO list that conflicts with things already present in /usr/bin, plus for completeness, the remaining executables from each included package that do not conflict (which are also present in /usr/bin). Marcel makes a good point, that software could be added to that list later. In such cases, the conflicting components may have been given a new location; however, it is incorrect to assume that those components ended up in /usr/sfw. (As, at the time of ARC proposal, the name conflict would have had to have been dealt with.) - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/
