Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo vs. the FHS

[Caleb Tennis <caleb@gentoo.org>]

On Tuesday 23 September 2003 03:08 pm, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
> There are other issues, too:

<snip>

I don't understand the logic behind blindly following a document like the FHS.  
If there are compelling reasons why a directory of installation path is 
incorrect, then it needs to be addressed.  However, I can tell you that 99% 
of Linux users have multiple directories underneath /mnt (cdrom, hd, 
usbhd...).  This is a violation of the FHS.

As far as I can tell, Gentoo only doesn't comply in areas where it made more 
sense for us to use something different.  If installing kde and qt into /opt 
is most important, why not symlink it there?

I guess I just fail to see the advantage of having an "FHS compliant" sticker 
on the proverbial box when it makes more sense to do things differently. And 
in some cases, it is only that way to support legacy users who are used to 
doing things a certain way.

I have yet to see an installation that is 100% FHS compliant.  I'd say that 
97% is pretty darn good. :)

Caleb


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list