[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: OCD programmers and backwards compatibility :-).



Alan wrote:
"Linux in general" would be better off if programs didn't have to know about a special layout just for Linux.. Remember, most of the apps we user aren't written specifically for Linux and calling your layout LSB sounds about as likely as
calling your character set ASCII in terms of getting any kind of  universal
agreement.  Why not try to make things the same across the *bsd's, Solaris,
OSX, etc. too, if you are going to have to deal with the problems of changes
anyway?

Perhaps you should read up on the FHS work a bit more before commenting.
It draws upon the basic work done in SunOS in particular for making NFS
work well, and traditional Unix layout, as well as 4BSD, SVID and other
related material. It's also followed pretty closely by a lot more than
Linux, and the lack of a "Linux" in the title of the standard is
intentional.


I've heard of the project before, but can't put my finger on anything that the
current version provides that couldn't have been done with backwards
compatibility as Solaris has done.   Instead we've had a decade of slow
and painful changes to new and more or less arbitrary locations.  (/opt is
in one year, /srv the next...)

--- Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell gmail com


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]