Status and outlook of LSB and FHS compliance of Fedora.

[Florian La Roche]

> That being said, there's no reason for Fedora not trying to be the teachers
> favorite, and providing this /svr solution.. However please then do it by
> placing some stratigicly chosen symlinks (ln -s /var/www/html /svr/www) and
> leaving the existing data layout as it is. That way Fedora could claim
> conformaty to the new standards, while not upsetting the current situation.

Right now we have one directory for html data files, that would add an
alternative path. That adds more confusion than helping the situation.
I do think the reasoning behind the LSB recommondataions make sense, but
they just come in too late and unless we have one setup between all
distributions on how we package things, the real chance to setup new defaults
is also non-existing.

> The only package i would like to nominate for some serious relocation of
> it's files would be mailman .. It's got it's own little world going on in
> /var/lib/mailman, with files that should really be located in /usr/bin (add,
> list_members, change_pw, check_db, etc) and /usr/libexec (qrunner) ..
> Preferably with binaries renamed to something less generic as 'list_members'
> (but instead mailman_list_members?).. But that's a whole 'nother gripe, and
> not really related to the /svr discussion (though somewhat related since
> it's a clear example of a non transparent and constent file layout and
> naming)

This could be a chance to start with one subdir in /srv for mailman.
Given we don't use /srv at all, it would also look kind of strange and
/var would again make more sense from a packaging standpoint.

> Anyhow, thats my 2 euro cents... Which from what my news feed tells me, is
> nowadays worth more then 2 US cents! :-)

It is not helping unix tradition and that we cannot turn back time and
start from scratch again. That would be great, right?

greetings,

Florian La Roche