hi All, Assuming we can (finally) close this issue as proposed by Alan Cox, attached is my proposed resolution to the comment raised against the LSB-FHS test specification.
@ 5.7-1(A), /var/mail Shouldn't this be /var/spool/mail with an optional symlink from /var/mail? Reviewer Response: [*** ACCEPT with modifications - The FHS 2.0 explicitly states that the mail directory be /var/mail however concerns have been raised with the specification, and this issue will be fed back to the FHS owner. The concensus position for the LSB is that /var/mail and /var/spool/mail should both point to the mail spool area, if the system supports it. Note for test strategy: It is undefined if these are symlinks, links or directories.] Note that I have sent all the other issues we have identified with the FHS2.0 specification to Dan for consideration in the next revision of the FHS. regards Andrew On Jan 30, 7:14pm in "Re: Resolutions to c", Alan Cox wrote: > > I'd like to propose that for now the FHS is changed to read > > "The mail spool area location is undefined. It is guaranteed that both > /var/mail and /var/spool/mail point to this mail spool area if the system > has a mail spool. The preferred reference name is /var/mail. > > [Rationale: /var/mail is the only name available on some other modern Unix > platforms. /var/spool/mail is the older Linux tradition and needed for > compatibility] > > [Rationale2: The physical location of the mail spool is not relevant to > an application and is administrator policy. It is thus left open.] > > > Can everyone live with that and bury the thread > > Alan > >-- End of excerpt from Alan Cox
