I have a general and a specific question.
First, the general question - The Policy Manual 2.4.1.0 contains
the same requirements regarding the FSSTND as previous versions: "The
location of all installed files and directories must comply fully
with the Linux Filesystem Structure (FSSTND)."
Compliance with the FHS is reported to be a goal for Debian 2.1.
I believe guidelines for this should be developed now, and new
packages being prepared for slink should follow these guidelines. I
suggest that the necessary discussions be started to develop policy
guidelines for the migration to the FHS should be started, and a copy
of the FHS be made available on the Debian web site.
My specific question relates to several packages that I am about
to upload, that should place files in /usr/share. Architecture
independent data-only files of this type were previously placed in a
subdirectory of /usr/lib. A brief discussion of this was held on
debian-devel a few weeks ago. All those who commented thought
/usr/share was the proper place for these files.
The FSSTND still thinks that linux is a one-architecture system
(Section 6.3), and has little to say about /usr/share, except that "no
program should ever reference anything in /usr/share".
To comply with this provision, I could create the symlink
/usr/lib/dict, pointing to /usr/share/dict, and use a /usr/lib path in
the dictd server's configuration file (which is the only way the
program accesses the files). In view of the impending adoption of the
FHS, I believe that would be a futile and unecessary exercise.
I note that many programs (lintian, for example) use /usr/share
directly. In view of the recent virulent discussions regarding
ignoring policy, I believe it is appropriate for a policy statement
supporting the use of /usr/share without symlinks.
Bob
--
_
|_) _ |_ Robert D. Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|_) (_) |_) Palm City, FL USA PGP Key ID: A8E40EB9
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
