'Bill Mitchell wrote:' > >Scott Blachowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > >> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > I agree. But, now you see that we have a script called /usr/bin/aout >> > and a potential directory called /usr/bin/aout. Hence my suggestion >> > that it ought to be called something else. with-aout perhaps. >>[...] >> Actually, I would argue that the _directory_ be someWHERE else. [...] > >Good point. From FSSTND 1.2, 3/28/95, section 3.1, para three: > > There should be no subdirectories within /bin. > >Given the intention of FSSTND compliance, this is an absolute >prohibition.
But what does FSSTND say about subdirectories of /usr/bin? I would hate to have the mh utilities stored in with the illions of programs already in /usr/bin. And where would the netpbm tools be stored [I dislike Red Hat's solution of all >100 utilities getting mixed up in /usr/bin]? Anyway, I'd like an option to avoid having > 500 programs in /usr/bin. Let "modularity" ring :) -- Christopher J. Fearnley | UNIX SIG Leader at PACS [EMAIL PROTECTED] (finger me!) | (Philadelphia Area Computer Society) [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Design Science Revolutionary http://www.netaxs.com/~cjf | Explorer in Universe "Dare to be Naive" -- Bucky Fuller | Linux Advocate
