On Sun, May 09, 1999 at 02:10:27AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: > PROPOSAL > ======== > > (1) That section 3.1 of the policy be rewritten replacing every > reference to "FSSTND" by the equivalent reference to "FHS". > > (2) That a period of consultation on -devel and/or -policy during the > course of the implementation of this change will determine which, > if any, exceptions to the FHS are required. This will form a new > section 3.1.3 of policy, whose exact wording obviously cannot be > proposed at this stage.
YES, PLEASE! By all means I second this. Even if all packages cannot move to FHS right away we need to do our best to become compatible with the FHS. This will be required for LSB compliance anyway, so we might as well get going on it. -- Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian GNU/Linux developer PGP: E8D68481E3A8BB77 8EE22996C9445FBE The Source Comes First! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- <dracus> Ctrl+Option+Command + P + R <Knghtbrd> dracus - YE GODS! That's worse than EMACS! <LauraDax> hehehehe <dracus> don't ask what that does :P
pgpJNA6I2zlOU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
