On Wed, Apr 14, 1999 at 04:48:39AM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote: > On Wed, Apr 14, 1999 at 03:02:11AM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > > > > Well personally I really disklike to have mountpoints under /mnt.. > > so, do we have the next battle after /var/spool/mail versus /var/mail ? > > It's unreasonable to change a working system from /var/spool/mail to > /var/mail. I suggest if /var/mail does not exist, create a symlink for > it pointing at /var/spool/mail. OTOH, I would suggest NEW installations > use /var/mail with /var/spool/mail being a symlink. > > Least surprise on upgrade, best results on new installation.
In fact, this is what will be probably in the next FHS: On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 04:29:34PM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > 1) /var/mail shall be either the location of the directory where > user's mail is stored, or a symlink to it. > > 2) /var/spool/mail shall be either the location of the directory where > users' mail is stored, or a symlink to it. > > 3) New applications shall use /var/mail. /var/spool/mail may be > deprecated in a future release. > I suggest we follow this, leave mailspool in /var/spool/mail and install a symlink from /var/mail. If /var/spool/mail will be ever become deprecated (and I bet it won't), then we will face the change (after all the packages have been modifyed). fab -- | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6F7267F5 fingerprint 57 16 C4 ED C9 86 40 7B 1A 69 A1 66 EC FB D2 5E | [EMAIL PROTECTED] gsm: +358 40 707 2468
