3:03 p.m.
On Fri, 2003-12-19 at 17:59, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
hi,
is FC2 going to be based on FHS 2.3 ?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't FHS 2.3 still at the beta 1 stage? I
see from the website (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/) latest is:
"The first beta of the 2.3 version is available here, released September
10, 2003."
This hardly seems like changes that should go into a stable
distribution. When something indicates it as at the early beta stages,
it is not something we should be seeing in Fedora Core releases.
Period.
-sb
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
4:22 p.m.
Hmm,
I've just looked at the new draft, and there aren't that many obvious
changes (I just skimmed the PDF for 2 minutes), apart from the
introduction of /media for removable media drives such as cdrom, floppy,
cdrecorder, flash etc. It seems to be quite a nice idea.
--Jon
Stan Bubrouski wrote:
On Fri, 2003-12-19 at 17:59, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
>hi,
>
>is FC2 going to be based on FHS 2.3 ?
>
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't FHS 2.3 still at the beta 1 stage? I
see from the website (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/) latest is:
"The first beta of the 2.3 version is available here, released September
10, 2003."
This hardly seems like changes that should go into a stable
distribution. When something indicates it as at the early beta stages,
it is not something we should be seeing in Fedora Core releases.
Period.
-sb
>--
>fedora-devel-list mailing list
>fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
>http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
5:33 p.m.
On Sat, 2003-12-20 at 17:22, Jon Atkinson wrote:
Hmm,
I've just looked at the new draft, and there aren't that many obvious
changes (I just skimmed the PDF for 2 minutes), apart from the
introduction of /media for removable media drives such as cdrom, floppy,
cdrecorder, flash etc. It seems to be quite a nice idea.
--Jon
Newsflash: that is a big change, and who knows if it will be in the
final draft after more input is garnered? I think it best to wait till
a standard is finalized before implementing pieces of it that may or may
not be there in the end.
-sb
6:38 p.m.
On Sat, 2003-12-20 at 14:22, Jon Atkinson wrote:
Hmm,
I've just looked at the new draft, and there aren't that many obvious
changes (I just skimmed the PDF for 2 minutes), apart from the
introduction of /media for removable media drives such as cdrom, floppy,
cdrecorder, flash etc. It seems to be quite a nice idea.
EEW! I hated that when SuSE started using /media... I'd really hate it
if it became an FHS standard. WTF was wrong with /mnt ?
--
Jesse Keating RHCE MCSE (geek.j2solutions.net)
Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedora.us/wiki/FedoraLegacy)
Mondo DevTeam (www.mondorescue.org)
GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
Was I helpful? Let others know:
http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating
11:02 a.m.
Jon Atkinson wrote:
I've just looked at the new draft, and there aren't that many
obvious
changes (I just skimmed the PDF for 2 minutes), apart from the
introduction of /media for removable media drives such as cdrom, floppy,
cdrecorder, flash etc. It seems to be quite a nice idea.
one important: in /usr/src/ is not allowed to build _any_ source.
So /usr/src/linux and /usr/src/redhat must be moved to another location.
8:39 a.m.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 06:02:48PM +0100, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
one important: in /usr/src/ is not allowed to build _any_ source.
So /usr/src/linux and /usr/src/redhat must be moved to another location.
/usr/src/linux is Linus own official building place for kernels and the
one all documentation uses, so the FHS won't get very far on that other than
laughed out of existance
10:44 a.m.
Alan Cox wrote:
/usr/src/linux is Linus own official building place for kernels and
the
one all documentation uses, so the FHS won't get very far on that other than
laughed out of existance
README file, of linux-2.4.24-pre2, is very clear here:
--cut--
[...]
INSTALLING the kernel:
- If you install the full sources, put the kernel tarball in a
directory where you have permissions (eg. your home directory) and
unpack it:
gzip -cd linux-2.4.XX.tar.gz | tar xvf -
Replace "XX" with the version number of the latest kernel.
Do NOT use the /usr/src/linux area! This area has a (usually
incomplete) set of kernel headers that are used by the library header
files. They should match the library, and not get messed up by
whatever the kernel-du-jour happens to be.
[...]
--end--
/usr must be a read only and very static fs.
"/usr is the second major section of the filesystem. /usr is shareable,
read-only data. That means that /usr should be shareable between various
FHS-compliant hosts and must not be written to. Any information that is
host-specific or varies with time is stored elsewhere."
"/usr/src : Source code (optional)
Purpose
Source code may be place placed in this subdirectory, only for reference purposes.*
* Generally, source should not be built within this hierarchy."
10:55 a.m.
On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 05:44:03PM +0100, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
/usr must be a read only and very static fs.
Right
"/usr is the second major section of the filesystem. /usr is
shareable,
read-only data. That means that /usr should be shareable between various
FHS-compliant hosts and must not be written to. Any information that is
host-specific or varies with time is stored elsewhere."
"/usr/src : Source code (optional)
Purpose
Source code may be place placed in this subdirectory, only for reference purposes.*
Rereading it while awake it makes a lot of sense. /usr/src/linux is used for
reference purposes (its headers etc). I'd not read the reference purposes bit
properly last night (well this morning...)
* Generally, source should not be built within this hierarchy."
And it says "generally", so its advisory but good advice.
11 a.m.
Stan Bubrouski wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't FHS 2.3 still at the beta
1 stage? I
see from the website (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/) latest is:
"The first beta of the 2.3 version is available here, released September
10, 2003."
latest 2.3 beta is nearly the final release. But it's stuck because there are
_only_ two pending items, /mnt vs. /media and /srv vs. agains_/srv.
People are waiting for a solition between the two teams, mdk_rh and suse_debian.
7440
days inactive
7444
days old
9 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Alan Cox -
Jesse Keating -
Jon Atkinson -
Stan Bubrouski -
Xose Vazquez Perez