[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Hurd FS hierarchy (was Re: LD_LIBRARY_PATH troubles)

From: Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom
Subject: Re: Hurd FS hierarchy (was Re: LD_LIBRARY_PATH troubles)
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 00:59:47 -0600
User-agent: Mutt/

On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 05:00:21PM -0500, Richard Kreuter wrote:
>   Here's the objection, for consideration: basing inclusion in /com on
> the capabilities of the relevant software will keep many things that
> should be shareable stuck in /var: if somebody puts together some
> program/system that does the right thing by non-host-specific files
> (i.e., reliably and correctly updates on multiple machines at once),
> then if inferior alternative program/systems are relevant (e.g.,
> supported by the distributor, commonly used, etc.), then the better
> software/system will be stuck putting files in /var instead of /com.
> (I recognize that /com is defined not by host-specificity, but data
> shareability, but presumably one wants the non-host-specific data to
> be shareable, right?)

This sounds interesting, but I'm not sure I fully grasp what you mean here.
I think it sounds a bit like one of the objections that I raised (that
membership in /com versus /var depends pretty heavily on the technology and
practice of the day, and may be different tomorrow, and different again the
day after).
perhaps you could clarify?

Carl Soderstrom.
Network Engineer
Real-Time Enterprises

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]