* Axel Beckert [2011-08-16 23:33 +0200]: > Besides the location of installed and generated files, their behaviour > should also comply to the FHS, i.e., programs like apt must not fail > if /var/cache/* is removed. On the other hand, local debian packages > for propritary software generated by scripts shipped in a Debian > package do not need to comply to the FHS. It is not clear where to > draw the line between these extremes, for example, would a script that > installs a software to a non-standard location (e.g., because upstream > has weird opinions about such things) after asking the user to confirm > this be allowed in Debian? Depending on a consensus to the former > question, the above sentence could be adapted or extended.
One way to draw the line between allowed and forbidden FHS violations could be: Packaged programs and scripts must adhere to the FHS, unless the user was previously asked for confirmation, or he or she explicitly requested such a FHS violation by running a command that is expected to ignore the FHS, for example one that creates a Debian package of a third party software which is commonly installed to non-standard locations. Carsten -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110816222338.gb27...@furrball.stateful.de
