On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 11:07:12PM -0500, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Am I wrong in assuming that the people responsible for FHS has already > > had this discussion? > > Fortunately we don't blindly follow the lead of others, but instead we > think for ourselves. While their discussion is useful as a reference, we > need to agree with their decision before implementing it.
Absolutely! Let us discuss this. But better would have been for us to discuss this when the folks at freestandards.org were discussing it. If it's such a bad idea, then maybe it should have been kept out of the standard. This is one of those "voice your opinion when it counts" sort of things. Gentoo Linux aims toward LSB (and therefore FHS) compliance. There is a difference between "deferring decision-making to others" and "blindly following the lead of others". Perhaps, though, Gentoo could join some of these working groups and open a few `liaison' projects thereto. Personally, I'm in favor of </srv>. Users need home directories, be they humans or daemons. Humans can logon to other machines. Ergo, </home> is shareable. Daemons cannot logon to other machines. Ergo, </srv> is not sharable. It may not have a great deal of precedent, but it's a good idea. -- Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"? Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action. --Ghost in the Shell
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
