Mike A. Harris
mharris at redhat.com
Wed Feb 4 22:13:27 UTC 2004
On Wed, 4 Feb 2004, Tim Waugh wrote:
>Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 16:53:57 +0000
>From: Tim Waugh <twaugh at redhat.com>
>To: fedora-devel-list at redhat.com
>Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
> protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="GFPlsJ7YtLjXgs8j"
>List-Id: Development discussions related to Fedora Core
>Subject: FHS 2.3?
>Do we intend to implement the new bits of FHS for Fedora Core 2? For
>instance, there is now wording about /usr/share/xml.
Many people have objections to things in the new FHS 2.3, and I'm
no exception. Nonetheless, the new FHS exists, and I'm curious
also what our official plans (if any yet) are with respect to the
Since many of us will have packages that are affected, there are
a few questions that would be good to know the answers to sooner
rather than later, however these questions might not yet have
solid answers, and may require some deliberation. Here are a few
questions on my mind at least:
- Are we going to support the FHS 2.3 or not?
- Are we going to wait until FHS 2.3 is adopted by LSB?
- If we are adopting FHS 2.3, what distribution will it be
targeting - FC2 / FC3 / RHEL4? beyond that?
Of course it may be too early for an answer to these questions to
be available yet, so Pentagon briefing style answers are
sufficient if necessary. ;o)
Mike A. Harris ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris
OS Systems Engineer - XFree86 maintainer - Red Hat
More information about the devel