Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
- To: Florian La Roche <florian@suse.de>
- Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@transmeta.com>, tytso@mit.edu, quinlan@transmeta.com, ewt@redhat.com, fhs-discuss@ucsd.edu, ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org, lsb-test@linuxbase.org, lsb-spec@linuxbase.org, lsb-spec@lists.linuxbase.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
- From: Gordon Tetlow <gordon.m.tetlow@vanderbilt.edu>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 09:47:41 -0600
- Message-id: <[🔎] 36A74C1D.7B3AB1C8@vanderbilt.edu>
- References: <[🔎] 199901210750.XAA25715@cesium.transmeta.com> <[🔎] 199901210753.XAA25754@cesium.transmeta.com> <[🔎] 19990121092136.A6788@knorke.saar.de>
Florian La Roche wrote:
>
> I can also see some points why /var/mail would be a better standard point
> if we would make a "new" decision about this. But Linux has a large user
> base now and after the move from /var/spool/mail to /var/mail, we would
> not have gained a lot. So why do it?
>
> There are reasons why all distributions stayed with /var/spool/mail.
> Even Debian who also thinks a lot about making things sane/clean has
> stayed with /var/spool/mail.
>
> This standardization project should be documenting the current state
> and the current movement. This will bring the Linux distributions
> together and manifest the (global) movement to a standard Linux system.
> I don't see any reason this project should dictate completely new
> things to the different Linux distributions. They already do their best
> to improve it.
I thought the purpose of this project (at least the FHS) is to create a standard
of what the filesystem should look like, not necessarily what it currently looks
like. Just because `Everyone is doing it' (tm) doesn't mean it's right.
Personally, I want Linux to be clean and elegant in its implementation, so if
that means breaking from convention and putting mail in /var/mail, so be it. I
for one don't know the answer. Whatever the answer is should be the right one,
not just the one people are doing.
Gordon Tetlow
Reply to: