At 2002/5/30 14:01-0700 Sean 'Shaleh' Perry writes: > > The issue is there is no difference (apparently) between something > that is allowed but not required and items that are required in the > test suite. A failure is a failure. We can not state "sorry we do > not provide functionality X".
Yes, whilst some of the commands and directories are only required if "the corresponding subsystem is installed" (which the fhs test suites handle by the upfront questions) there are many which are required by the FHS. I believe the intent is to radically reduce the number of these in the next version of the FHS, leaving a few examples, but mainly relying on rules to classify where a given binary should live. This will however make it harder to test (where a binary should live can depend on the exact functionality offered by that binary) but if we have been precise enough in the specification of the commands in the gLSB we can have a LSB specific FHS test suite. And existence of directories will remain important. Regards, Chris -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] IBM OzLabs Linux Development Group Canberra, Australia -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
