[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: Stefan Karrmann
Subject: Re: Hurd FS hierarchy (was Re: LD_LIBRARY_PATH troubles)
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 15:46:05 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.25i

Marcus Brinkmann schrieb folgendes am Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 06:51:01PM +0100:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 05:14:06PM +0000, a b wrote:
> > If we have a /package-hierarchy we can provide backward compatibility to 
> > most parts of FHS by symlinks.
> We would use translators rather.

Thats, no problem, but an improvement.

> > To get one hierarchy for packages and a registration of packages, see
> >
> We won't ever let some obscure web page in Tonga decide what names we can use
> or not ;)

Do you know qmail and its author Dan Bernstein. He uses the upper address.
Of course GNU can set up an own registry for package names and an own scheme
for storing packages. Slashpackage is not in all aspects optimal, but contains
a lot of good ideas.

> > We should separate sharability from filenames for access, cp.
> >
> I am not convinced.  /usr/spool/mail is broken to begin with, for example.

In slashpackage you would use, e.g. /package/mailspool/default and this might
be (or not) a symlink to /share/system/package/mailspool/default depending on
local sharability policy.

Stefan Karrmann

reply via email to

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