Rich McClellan wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jun 2000, Richard Gooch wrote:
>
> > And when you say "the various distros...", are you sure you aren't
> > really saying "they're doing it differently from RedHat"? Despite what
> > many people may think, RedHat is not the standard.
>
> Quite sure. In fact I think Red Hat is an offender: Look where they have
> placed the samba and apache files. Furthemore, I qualified my remarks by
> saying I didn't want to start a distro Jihad, and I still don't, but it's
> vital to Linux's near term adoption that the various distros do the
> "basic" things the same way and follow the precedents set by the more
> mature Unix OSes.
Let me qualify myself as saying I'm a Debian user, and that I prefer a
non-massive /etc. As such, I prefer autofs existing as /etc/autofs/*,
and not /etc/auto.*; it is different, sure, than redhat and derived
products, but if you want to say to base it on mature Unix OSes, what
exactly do you mean? Solaris has tons of subdirectories under /etc,
calls fstab vfstab, calls exports dfs/something, with a bazillion links
for *most* files in subdirectories, and even places files in there that
cause a grep to hang. Digital Unix / OSF places many of these files in
/sbin. I don't consider either of these precedents worth following, and
they are (at least Solaris is) in the space that we want Linux to be
able to compete. At some point, you have to stop being a follower, and
start being a leader. RedHat puts rc.d in /etc/init.d, which I don't
think is right, either. /etc/rc.d is fine without an extra subdir in
there.
Christopher
--
Oh My God! They Killed init! You Bastards!!
make install; not war
