On Sun, Jan 30, 2000 at 06:28:54PM -0500, Dan Papasian wrote: > If I understand properly, FHS is a "linux standard" > > I'm not understanding this. There are already UNIX standards out > there, such as SUSv2, and SysV and BSD systems to study. > > It would make more sense for Linux to follow an existing UNIX standard > than create their own.
FSSTND was linux-only. FHS is reasonable to use on every macrokernel unix, and is more-or-less followed by all modern macrokernel unices. (GNU/Hurd doesn't follow it, because it doesn't map 1:1 storage devices and mount points) > -Dan Papasian > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Sun, Jan 30, 2000 at 06:08:15PM +0000, Steve Shorter wrote: > > I'm sure FHS will have something to see about this. Why not > > follow it. Its been a while since I read it, but it seems to solve the > > whole issue for us doesn't? If we adopt it I mean. I think we should.
