Will Lowe writes: > On Fri, 30 Jan 1998, Yann Dirson wrote: > > > [6.3] "The directory /usr/share typically contains > > architecture-independent files such as man-pages, timezone, terminfo > > information, etc." > [...] > > As of this time, with Debian going multiplatform, it seems we should > > push towards using /usr/share where this makes sense, as soon as > > possible (maybe for 2.0). This will make integrating "heterogeneous" > The move to the new FSSTND (I don't remember the new acronym) was put off > until Debian 2.1 because it requires us to move /var/lib/dpkg/* and make a > few other corrections that are going to be absolutely a wreck. The move > to glibc is screwy enough on its own that we need to get it finished 'fore > we play with too many other things ... :)
I don't think it would be so much work. A new paragraph in the policy could be written, recommending the use of /usr/share/, while still using symlinks to not break everything, for now. Then, full FHS implementation will be left for 2.1, I didn't suggest to start out the whole mess at once. But if, say, FHS prohibits /usr/share/, then I'll shut up at once, as it won't lead us anywhere to push towards an already obsolete (part of) file hierarchy. > > [6.3] "no program should ever reference anything in /usr/share." > No clue. Might be becase /usr/share could be shared across different > architectures (hence the name) and therefore isn't likely to reside on a > local disk in an NFS environment, so references to a filesystem that > might not be around could be bad. Hmmm... what good will it bring to refer to, say, /usr/man/ if the latter is a link to /usr/share/man/, with /usr/share/ being NFS-mounted ? -- Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Stop making M$-Bill richer & richer, alt-email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | support Debian GNU/Linux: debian-email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | more powerful, more stable ! http://www.a2points.com/homepage/3475232 | Check <http://www.debian.org/>
