Subject: Re: /usr/share NOT?
To: David Gilbert <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Chris G Demetriou <Chris_G_Demetriou@UX2.SP.CS.CMU.EDU>
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
> 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).