Ok, I'm changing my vote (again). 1st preference: 1 forest of symlinks 2nd preference: 3 revert fsstnd->fhs directory changes, with advice 3rd preference: 0 further discussion Opinion. I wonder if I ought to disqualify myself for being so uncertain about this issue. I don't like any of these options. For this reason, and because there's no tie, I'm not adding my chairman's vote to the mix. I guess I'm hoping that someone else will speak up and point out some other fundamental issue that I'm missing. Also, for the long run, it would be good to implement an update-fsstnd-link program (args: add/remove and packagename). This way this transition policy could be updated without having to change every deployed package. This would require that every essential package predepend on the package (fhs-support?) which supplies this program, and would require mention in the release notes for people who install potato packages on slink systems. -- Raul
Attachment:
pgpUbzpiqJy8q.pgp
Description: PGP signature