Re: Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS) and NetBSD

[der Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost>]

> Well, I can't speak to past sins.  But *my* motivation is certainly
> not "hey, everyone, endorse every fool thing we've been doing for the
> past decade!"

I don't think Thor meant to imply it was.  But that _is_ what it often
feels like from this side of the fence.

> "Strictly limited to Linux" is being thrown around; that's what
> motivated my posts here and elsewhere.  It sounds like it may be the
> right course of action.

Well, personally, I suspect that the differences among Unix variants
are great enough that trying to cover them all will end up suffering
from one or both of two problems: (1) the problem of describing the
intersection of them all and thus describing little but the V7ish core
that, while an important core, is always extended and thus not that
useful by itself, and (2) describing the union of them all and thus
being little but a minefield of "on OSes A, B, D, F, I, J, and K"
qualifiers.  It might be possible to steer a course between those, but
I also fear the line between them is of negative width.

Of course, I could be wrong, and it's not for me to tell others what to
do even if I think their choice of task is quixotic - I've been wrong
often enough and doubtless will be plenty often again.

>> Heaven forfend that this "standard" were to be -- for example --
>> incorporated by reference into some larger standard to which we
>> _did_ want to conform.  Let's just please avoid that!
> If we continue to ride that flight of fancy, which standards might
> those be?

Probably POSIX, if I were to guess.  They've certainly done "pick what
this Unix variant does and dictate that everyone else shall do it too"
often enough already.

/~\ The ASCII                             Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML                mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email!           7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B