(Fwd) Re: Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) compliancy?

[Forrest J. Cavalier III]

> From:          James Ralston <qralston+ml.inn-workers at andrew.cmu.edu>
> To:            inn-workers at isc.org
> Subject:       Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) compliancy?

> Thoughts?

Are you discussing INN 2.x?  It sounds like you describe the INN 1.x
defaults.  I like the way it is now, but if you really want 
FHS you can get close using the arguments to configure.
Set the directory prefixes how you like.

I agree with Brandon, I don't see a good reason to split all the INN
binaries into different places, or shove them in with the rest of
the system.  It makes it very hard for new admins to get a logical
view of what goes with what, and there is the problem of name and
version collisions with things like rnews.  I am asked do work on
a number of INN systems, installed by different people, on various
flavors of hardware.  FHS installations are the most difficult to
work on.  I keep a notebook just so I know where to find the config
files on each system.  Most of the time, the admin there already
got sick and tired of hunting around, and there are directory symlinks
everywhere.  /news/log -> /var/log/news/, etc.

You said you never saw it discussed here.  Getting INN into its 
current install state was hard.  There was a protracted discussion
on this list with many people having strong opinions.  Go read the
archives.  (Probably from 1997, early 1998.)

-------------------------------------------------------------------

What do you like about FHS that you can't get by setting the
configure prefixes?