Actually, Alan Cox sums up the problem better than I did... ;)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 00:37:41 +0000 (GMT)
From: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: H. Peter Anvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
debian-devel@lists.debian.org
[cc: list striped]
Subject: Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
Resent-Date: 26 Jan 1999 00:38:45 -0000
Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ;
> 1. Interoperability with other systems.
10+ million Linux boxes use /var/spool/mail. Its also a spurious claim. All
existing tools assume linux uses /var/spool/mail. Other systems even sharing
via NFS dont get problems with this /var/spool usage
> 2. Disk space management.
We've proved between us that both views are held here. This therefore is a
rather spurious claim. A (maybe) symlink called /var/spool/mail that points
somewhere arbitary is all that is needed for this issue. The FHS need
say nothing else
Your arguments don't IMHO hold water, nor in fact anything else
--
While this is an open list, non-committee members are asked to lurk quietly.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
