* Laszlo (Laca) Peter <laca at sun.com> [2006-12-13 20:22]: > On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 16:54 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote: > > /usr/gnu Directory hierarchy Stable > > /bin > > /sbin > > /include > > /lib > > /libexec > > /share > > /share/info > > /share/man > > > > /etc/gnu Directory hierarchy Stable > > > > /var/gnu Directory hierarchy Stable > > /com > > I realise this case only defines the namespace, but I think there > should be more details about the expected use to avoid misinterpreting > and misusing it, like /usr/sfw was. > For example, right now there is no reason for using /usr/gnu/libexec > or /usr/gnu/share/info as they have no counterparts in /usr and > therefore no conflict is possible. I agree that /usr/gnu/share/info is non-conflicting with a possible /usr/share/info; will amend.
*/libexec, I admit, scares me a bit more, as I still can't tell if its use is consistent across upstream packages. > BTW, I thought in the last iteration of the /usr/gnu proposal we > were talking about /usr/share/man/man1gnu and 1GNU section, not > /usr/gnu/share/man. When we learned that the section ordering support in MANPATH is OpenSolaris man(1)-specific, we reset to a pure path-based approach. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/
