Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) compliancy?

[Russ Allbery]

James Ralston <qralston+ml.inn-workers at andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

> I've been subscribed to this list for quite a while, and as well as I
> can remember, this topic hasn't come up.

> Has anyone put any thought towards whether making the INN distribution
> compliant with version 2.1 of the FHS would be a good thing?

I personally detest the FHS for things like INN and find it constantly
annoying that Red Hat insists on scattering INN to the winds all over the
disk so that new INN users can't ever find anything and can't follow any
of the standard instructions.  It's currently possible to configure INN to
do that if you really want; I'm not personally inclined to make it any
more the default (although if someone wanted to simplify it down to a
single configure switch or something, patches would be gratefully
accepted).

Within its own playground, INN *should* use standard directory names, and
by and large I think it currently does (ie, bin, man, etc, lib, etc.).

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>