[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alfred M. Szmidt) writes: > I really would like to know who everyone is here, there are already a > couple questions about Daniel's response to me on the FHS list about > not a distribution is not allowed to add root-level directories.
Sorry, I can't even parse that. > For example, the FHS wants to introduce an /srv directory, but systems > must start using it before it gets an entry in the FHS. Which would > mean that all systems have to break compliance with the FHS before > being able to be compliant. Huh? Not at all. Debian, for example, has each Debain release match a specific version of FHS, not just whatever happens to be most recent. FHS people should not resist making changes on some theory that it will create a period where distributions will be noncompliant. Rather, we'll be complaint with a previous version, and not the current, until a later release. > > Moreover, Debian has already decided that it *won't* create top-level > > directories beyond the FHS as long as there are "other places" to put > > the same things, so adding a "you can make new top level directories" > > sentence to FHS wouldn't change things. > > If Debian has already decided that, then please point me to this > decision, as I cannot find anything in the Debian Policy Manual (I > only took a brief look, so maybe I missed something) That's my take on the actual political facts. I'm just saying: Even if FHS says that distributions could create their own top-level dirs, it's exceedingly unlikely that Debian would do so.
