|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > January 2004 > FHS compliance?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| Joel Konkle-Parker 2004-01-28, 4:33 pm |
| According to Martin's post to debian-lsb
<http://lists.debian.org/debian-lsb/...1/msg00000.html>,
FHS 2.3 has just been released. I noticed in the Policy Manual (9.1.1)
that we only are required to comply with FHS 2.1.
Why the lag? With the new release, should we at least look towards 2.2
compliance? Or is there some kind of show-stopper that's preventing this?
--
Joel Konkle-Parker
Webmaster [Ballsome.com]
E-mail [jjk3@msstate.edu]
Phone [662-518-1636]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Martin Michlmayr 2004-01-28, 11:34 pm |
| * Joel Konkle-Parker <jjk3@msstate.edu> [2004-01-28 23:44]:quote:
> According to Martin's post to debian-lsb
> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-lsb/...1/msg00000.html>,
> FHS 2.3 has just been released. I noticed in the Policy Manual (9.1.1)
> that we only are required to comply with FHS 2.1.
>
> Why the lag? With the new release, should we at least look towards 2.2
> compliance? Or is there some kind of show-stopper that's preventing this?
I don't think there's a good reason (at least for 2.2) - it just
hasn't been done yet. 
See:
#212434 - [PROPOSED] recommend FHS 2.2 rather than 2.1
#230217 - [PROPOSAL] Should update to Filesystem Hierarchy Standard FHS 2.3
--
Martin Michlmayr
tbm@cyrius.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
|