Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) compliancy?

Russ Allbery rra at stanford.edu
Fri Aug 11 23:47:16 UTC 2000


James Ralston <qralston+ml.inn-workers at andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
> On 11 Aug 2000, Russ Allbery wrote:

>> Bleh.  share vs. lib is such an annoying argument.

> Perhaps, but I think the distinction has merit.

Maybe, for a narrow band of intermediate sites.  For a small software
installation, it's annoying; for a huge software installation (which is
what I maintain as part of my day job), it's worthless because you have
every package in its own separate directory tree anyway (anything else is
completely unmaintainable if you're trying to scale up to a half-dozen
platforms and hundreds of packages of varying versions) and share properly
lives at the same level as each platform-specific subtree within the
package volume.  And at that level, it has to be managed by your package
utility, not by the software's make install.

> But it's also variable, so under the FHS, it would go under /var, as
> would other directories that contain data that will change during the
> operation of the system.  (E.g., /var/news/db, /var/news/tmp.)

Okay.

People want active, newsgroups, active.times, etc. in a different
directory than the history file; we should figure out what to call those
directories.

> (/var/news/run would more properly be /var/run/news, as the /var/run
> directory is explicitly enumerated by the FHS.  So is /var/lock, for
> that matter.)

/usr/local/news/lock should just be thrown out completely, along with
shlock, in favor of fcntl locking.  But I digress.

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



More information about the inn-workers mailing list