Subject: Re: /usr/share NOT?
To: David Gilbert <>
From: Chris G Demetriou <Chris_G_Demetriou@UX2.SP.CS.CMU.EDU>
List: current-users
Date: 04/22/1996 01:12:51
> 	I've noticed in particular that the fortune database and the
> localization (or wherever the clib error messages come from) database
> are non-shareable.
> 	Is it desireable that we either make these files shareable, or
> alternatively have /usr/share/motorola and /usr/share/intel to hold
> the files that are not shared.

They should be fixed to be properly shareable, or they should go into

If there were to be 'byte-order-dependent' chunks of share, certainly
they should be better names than what you propose...  but there
shouldn't be.

> 	Which brings me to my last point.  vi will not run without
> /usr/share.  This is a downright pain in the ass if /usr/share is
> nfs.  It would be an improvement if vi would kick itself into 'open
> mode' when it couldn't divine the terminal properly.

Well, then, by all means, get in touch with Keith Bostic, and do it!
However, I doubt you'll find it that easy... because if it were, he'd
have done it already, i'd guess.

Of course, there's always 'ed' (and i'm not joking).