On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:11:27PM -0800, David.Comay at sun.com wrote: > >I thought the proposal was for pretty much what you suggest. > > One notable exception is the proposal calls out that /usr/gnu is a > fully populated - namely, even if there is no conflicting name in > /usr/bin, there is still a component in /usr/gnu/bin (either > /usr/bin/prog symlinks to /usr/gnu/bin/prog or vice-versa.) This is > different from /usr/xpg[46] which are sparse directories and only > contain conflicting components.
That's not how I read this: > In the case that an environment composed of the non-conflicting GNU > components plus the historical variants is desired, > > PATH=/usr/bin:...
