Getting rid of /usr for F12?
jkeating at j2solutions.net
Mon Apr 20 19:12:29 UTC 2009
On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 22:02 +0300, Juha Tuomala wrote:
> It sounds like there should first be a specification and
> then we should implement it. That would be nice, but unfortunately
> there isn't. This industry has plenty of examples from de-facto
> implementations until they are formally standardized.
There is a specification, which is that the site admin gets to decide
how that path is used. That is it. Period.
> > /srv/ is hands off, undefined layout to be managed by the local admin,
> > period. We can't make any assumptions about what is in there, nor how
> > it is being used.
> If shell looks under /srv in addition to /etc/profile.d it would allow
> local admins use it.
Look where though? We can't pre-create directories, nor can we assume
any layout as that may have adverse effects based on how the admin is
> If they choose not to, they should do nothing. Such
> improvement could even be switched off in some /etc/sysconfig file easily.
> I don't see how it would intrude their autonomous area if it wont
> force them into anything.
> The whole point of /srv is to have your server's role data in single
> location for obvious reasons. I can imagine that people running Fedora
> as server would appreciate such option due more frequent upgrades.
/srv exists as a place admins can put things without worry of the
operating system interfering. Once you start interfering, /srv/ looses
it's usefulness, and admins will start making /data or /web or other
such things again.
Jesse Keating RHCE (http://jkeating.livejournal.com)
Fedora Project (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating)
GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20090420/1987b3b8/attachment.bin
More information about the devel