[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
According to fhs, where should I mount network shares, e.g. a share for
data exchange within a company ? /mnt is for temporary use only, but I
don't know a better place...
Historically, I've always mounted them at /nfs/machine-name/whatever.
The important p
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > acctually you can mount them anywhere you want. i bet /mnt or /home .
> > just dont mount them to /etc or /sbin or something, that would be
> > too weird...
the right place to mount media and other PCs over nfs is a pissing cont
Hello,
> acctually you can mount them anywhere you want. i bet /mnt or /home .
> just dont mount them to /etc or /sbin or something, that would be
> too weird...
I know I can mount everything where I want -- technically speaking. But
the sense of the fhs (http://www.pathname.co
acctually you can mount them anywhere you want. i bet /mnt or /home .
just dont mount them to /etc or /sbin or something, that would be too weird...
On 9/12/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
Hello,According to fhs, where should I mount network shares, e.g. a share f
Hello,
According to fhs, where should I mount network shares, e.g. a share for
data exchange within a company ? /mnt is for temporary use only, but I
don't know a better place...
cu
Markus Grunwald
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe
cleared between system boots, and is
> > > appropriate for data which *must* not be preserved between boots. The
> > > definitions are not identical, the directories are not equivalent.
> >
> > Your definition above is much stricter than what the FHS actually says, and
&g
Marc Wilson said on Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 11:01:12PM -0800:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 12:17:52PM -0800, Mark Ferlatte wrote:
> > Minor nit: netatalk requires a device node in /var to support Appletalk
> > printing. Admittedly, for most people, this is not an issue.
>
> Not arguing, but what device
"Karsten M. Self" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003:12:03:06:15:29-0800] scribed:
>
> See, variously, the FHS, and my own partitioning guidelines:
>
> http://twiki.iwethey.org/Main/NixPartitioning
Since Debian places logfiles under /var/log, I always create a sepa
on Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 12:17:52PM -0800, Mark Ferlatte ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Karsten M. Self said on Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 06:15:29AM -0800:
> > See, variously, the FHS, and my own partitioning guidelines:
> >
> > http://twiki.iwethey.org/Main/NixPartitioning
>
On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 12:17:52PM -0800, Mark Ferlatte wrote:
> Minor nit: netatalk requires a device node in /var to support Appletalk
> printing. Admittedly, for most people, this is not an issue.
Not arguing, but what device node? Where? When did this start? What
creates it? The package d
On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 06:15:29 -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
>
> You're strongly counseled to read standard texts on Unix administration
> such as Nemeth, et al.
>
>
> Peace.
I think there's a text called "Bugs and Daffy Go Filesystem Partitioning"
which might be a good place to start.
:>
--
Karsten M. Self said on Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 06:15:29AM -0800:
> See, variously, the FHS, and my own partitioning guidelines:
>
> http://twiki.iwethey.org/Main/NixPartitioning
Good page. I should have known about the Jihad.
> - /var need only be writeable and executable (n
t; Is there any need for a /boot partition on modern hardware? Why do you
> > > like a seperate boot partition?
> > >
> > > I'm just curious as to the reasoning behind your partitioning scheme.
> > >
> > > M
> >
> > FHS says "The co
Tom Allison wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> >Tom Allison wrote:
> >>FHS says that this directory is for "binaries not needed in single user
> >>mode".
> >>But then I went over and looked at the /opt which also seemed rather
> >>reasonable as
on Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 07:18:45AM -0400, Tom Allison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> >On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 02:35:44AM -0400, Tom Allison wrote:
> >
> >>FHS says that this directory is for "binaries not needed in single
> >>user mode&quo
Tom,
On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 07:18:45 -0400
Tom Allison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wouldn't it be possible to utilize /opt for big packages (open office,
>
> mozilla, KDE, Gnome, Java) and still leave /opt for system
> administrators?
>
> I kind of like the idea of putting what you need for the b
Tom writes:
> Wouldn't it be possible to utilize /opt for big packages (open office,
> mozilla, KDE, Gnome, Java) and still leave /opt for system
> administrators?
That would violate the FHS.
/opt was invented by the proprietary Unices. The FHS includes it as a
concession to so
Colin Watson wrote:
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 02:35:44AM -0400, Tom Allison wrote:
FHS says that this directory is for "binaries not needed in single user
mode".
But then I went over and looked at the /opt which also seemed rather
reasonable as a place to put things.
It also seems a
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 02:35:44AM -0400, Tom Allison wrote:
> FHS says that this directory is for "binaries not needed in single user
> mode".
> But then I went over and looked at the /opt which also seemed rather
> reasonable as a place to put things.
>
> It also
I was trolling through the Debain Policy Manual and then the referenced FHS
and came up wit a question.
This is just an example.
openoffice is installed from .debs that I obtained (I believe) from a
non-debian sanctioned location:
deb http://ftp.sk.debian.org/openoffice-debian/ stable main
"martin" == martin f krafft writes:
martin> I usually use /home/cvs/ in case you are
martin> interested.
Colin Watson also suggested this, and I think I will go with
this. Thanks to all for the suggestions.
Cheers!
Shyamal
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a su
it?
my guess for complete FHS compliance is to put it into /var/local to
accord to the /usr/local rule for everything put into a local directory
which is specific to your machine.
/home may be right also, but is usually linked to existing users.
> Can I put the new repositories in /var/local? Wha
n symlink
> > /var/lib/cvs to /cvs/firstgroup, and then you don't even the folks
> > who've already been using your cvs server!
>
> ... which is not compliant with the FHS standard, so at least it won't
> be made official.
Yeah, but see my comments on who the F
he folks
> who've already been using your cvs server!
... which is not compliant with the FHS standard, so at least it won't
be made official. I usually use /home/cvs/ in case you are
interested.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :' :proud D
hiya,
building from the previous post, i'd suggest saving the keystrokes
and putting them into subdirectories in /cvs. you could then symlink
/var/lib/cvs to /cvs/firstgroup, and then you don't even the folks
who've already been using your cvs server!
--sean
msg12609/pgp0.pgp
Description:
re in /home - /home/cvs, maybe?
Don't worry too much about Debian policy and the FHS, other than keeping
out of the way of places they label as being for system use; they're
documents that distributions have to worry about, not really users. For
instance, the debian.org machines keep al
nt to know what the "best practice" is. I read the policy and
FHS manuals but came away unsure.
It seems that the repositories should not be in their own
subdirectories of /var/lib. FHS suggests that subdirectories in
/var/lib shold be per package, with the exception of /var/lib/misc. So
c
on Fri, Jun 21, 2002, Jerome BENOIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Bonjour,
>
> I have just install the "/opt" directory,
> and I wonder where to put the directory "/opt/bin"
> in the ENV_PATH varibles (defined in `/etc/login.defs'.
/opt is a "local variants" convention. Depending on which side of
Bonjour,
I have just install the "/opt" directory,
and I wonder where to put the directory "/opt/bin"
in the ENV_PATH varibles (defined in `/etc/login.defs'.
Thanks in advance,
Jerome BENOIT
--
Jerome BENOIT, Ph.D.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subjec
On 20-Jun-2002 Matthew Tedder wrote:
>
> How compliant with the FHS and LSB standards is Debian to date?
> Also, is LVM and ReiserFS available?
>
We are about as FHS as one can be. The LSB is still getting fleshed out, we
are fairly conforming but not perfect yet.
My understan
How compliant with the FHS and LSB standards is Debian to date?
Also, is LVM and ReiserFS available?
Matthew
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mpliant with the FHS. The question is: How can i fix the "wrong
> machines"? How can i clean up my rootfs, change the symlinks to fit my
> needs and etc??? I know that this is a hard job, and there are not
> formula... but i don't know how can i start! :) Do you know about
the FHS. The question is: How can i fix the "wrong
machines"? How can i clean up my rootfs, change the symlinks to fit my
needs and etc??? I know that this is a hard job, and there are not
formula... but i don't know how can i start! :) Do you know about
scripts that would help
think that we need a /media hierarchy. and from what i
> > can tell, that's the current state on the fhs-discuss mailing list.
> > /media for all kinds of removable media, a subdirectory for each
> > therein, and /mnt as a temporary mount point, and nothing more!
>
> I
on Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 11:08 AM +0100, martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> > Note three, that the FHS _doesn't_ proscribe inclusion of additional
> > mount points, directories, etc., at root (/). It merely speaks to those
> > directories which are required or
on Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 10:48 PM +0100, martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> also sprach Mark Ferlatte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.22.1919 +0100]:
> > My point is, it's a stupid design decision that (thankfully) is being
> > corrected, but MS isn't the only group of people guilty of this
on Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 01:31 AM +0100, martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> also sprach Mark Ferlatte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.22.0121 +0100]:
> > You know, MS isn't the only one that does this... the Linux SCSI
> > implementation would assign /dev/sda to the lowest SCSI ID on the cha
Mark Ferlatte wrote:
> True. But passing commandline args and editing fstab is still annoying
> behavior... ideally, if I had a new disk and reboot, _nothing_ should
> change with respect to my old disks.
Then you probably want to put UUID's in your fstab. man fstab.
--
see shy jo
On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 05:32:23PM -0500, Rob Mahurin wrote (1.00):
> In this case, wouldn't you just put the new disk at the end of the
> chain (sd[last] rather than sd[first])?
Well, ideally you don't have any kind of order:
/dev/bus/scsi/0/1
would be the device with id 0, partition 1. This i
On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 02:04:20PM -0800, Mark Ferlatte wrote:
> True. But passing commandline args and editing fstab is still annoying
> behavior... ideally, if I had a new disk and reboot, _nothing_ should
> change with respect to my old disks.
In this case, wouldn't you just put the new disk a
On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 10:48:58PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote (1.00):
> at lilo: linux root=/dev/sdb1
True enough. If you use grub, then it's even less of a problem.
> if sda just moved to sdb. you need to boot anyway, and once you made it
> to the prompt, you change lilo.conf (sorry, left tha
also sprach Mark Ferlatte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.22.1919 +0100]:
> A complete inability to boot because the root partition is now
> elsewhere.
at lilo: linux root=/dev/sdb1
if sda just moved to sdb. you need to boot anyway, and once you made it
to the prompt, you change lilo.conf (sorry, le
On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 01:31:29AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote (1.00):
> > drives you've already had, all of your drive letters would move up by
> > one, 'causing no end of trouble.
>
> a short edit of /etc/fstab
> a possible recreation of a symlink in /dev, or two, or three
>
> what else?
A co
es such as backups, which one presumably
> > would not make of temporarially mounted, removeable, storage.
>
...
>
> instead, i really think that we need a /media hierarchy. and from what i
> can tell, that's the current state on the fhs-discuss mailing list.
> /media for all
also sprach Mark Ferlatte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.22.0121 +0100]:
> You know, MS isn't the only one that does this... the Linux SCSI
> implementation would assign /dev/sda to the lowest SCSI ID on the chain,
> so if you went back and added a new drive who's ID was lower than the
> drives you'v
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 06:21:26PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote (1.00):
> - Drive letters (yes you can map around them) restrict you to 26 disks.
> Including remote maps. Driveletters move (often arbitrarially) when
> devices are added and removed.
You know, MS isn't the only one that d
y Debian.
>
> > Note too, from a system management perspective, use of /mnt gives a
> > single point of control for issues such as backups, which one presumably
> > would not make of temporarially mounted, removeable, storage.
>
> yes. i'll get to that.
>
> > Note
for issues such as backups, which one presumably
> would not make of temporarially mounted, removeable, storage.
yes. i'll get to that.
> Note three, that the FHS _doesn't_ proscribe inclusion of additional
> mount points, directories, etc., at root (/). It merely speaks to t
On Mon, 2002-01-21 at 02:07, Mark Blunier wrote:
> However, if a program
> needs to mount a file system temporarily, it needs to know of a
> place that it can assume is 'safe'.
[presuming /mnt is available for that purpose, and doesn't have other
stuff under it]
Unless, of course, another progra
on Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 05:39:13PM -0800, ben ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Sunday 20 January 2002 03:51 pm, Karsten M. Self wrote:
>
> > Assuming you've only got one of something sounds so...Microsoft.
>
> assuming that i've got only one...? sounds like a lame construction of
> whatever point
Previously Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com):
> ...and if you have an arrray of 100 CDRs? Should you have /cdrom[0-99]
> or /mnt/cdrom[0-99]? I'd prefer the latter.
Then do the latter, its your choice. However, if a program
needs to mount a file system temporarily, it needs to know of a
On Sunday 20 January 2002 03:51 pm, Karsten M. Self wrote:
>
> Assuming you've only got one of something sounds so...Microsoft.
>
assuming that i've got only one...? sounds like a lame construction of
whatever point you're trying to make. unusual lack of cogency in this post,
karsten.
> Peace.
mountable peripherals. Before, I haved symbolic links in '/' to these
> > directories. I removed them to make '/' cleaner.
>
> which is exactly the point, and which violates the FHS:
>
> section 3.11: "/mnt : Mount point for a temporarily mounted filesystem&quo
on Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 02:35:58AM -0800, ben ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 January 2002 02:06 am, martin f krafft wrote:
> i agree. it was one of the pleasures of discovering debian to find that
> something i had always considered redundant was not employed in the debian
> filesyst
on Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 12:32:54PM -0500, Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> ben wrote:
> > i agree. it was one of the pleasures of discovering debian to find that
> > something i had always considered redundant was not employed in the debian
> > filesystem. why shouldn't floppies and other r
also sprach Romuald DELAVERGNE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.17.0958 +0100]:
> If we respect the FHS like this, you are right.
> But perhaps the FHS is too old on severals points and need to evoluate ?
which is what we're doing AFAIK...
--
martin; (greetings from
also sprach ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.17.1320 +0100]:
> this is getting really fucking boring. the fhs, just like the government,
> should restrict its intrusion into my life to the point of the most minimal,
> not maximal, necessity. let the fhs set up a criteria based
also sprach Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.17.0541 +0100]:
> Wouldn't this usually go in /var? Say, /var/mirrors?
which would also offend the FHS, section 5.1
"Applications must generally not add directories to the top level of
/var. Such directories should on
e sense to have a mount point for one
> > > filesystem but not for few of them.
> >
> > as others have said and suggested, i also rarely use /mnt. if i need a
> > mount point, i'll quickly create one on the fly. i believe there are
>
> the question was _WHE
or few of them.
>
> as others have said and suggested, i also rarely use /mnt. if i need a
> mount point, i'll quickly create one on the fly. i believe there are
the question was _WHERE_ (with implied: so that it doesn't break FHS).
[we are not talking about mount for one user,
ystems.
>
If we respect the FHS like this, you are right.
But perhaps the FHS is too old on severals points and need to evoluate ?
On Wed, 16 Jan 2002 23:34:01 -0500 Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul E Condon wrote:
> > As an example: before I read the FHS, I set up a local mirror of the
> > Debian packages using apt-move. I decided to create a root level
> > directory /mirror and to pu
Paul E Condon wrote:
> As an example: before I read the FHS, I set up a local mirror of the
> Debian packages using apt-move. I decided to create a root level
> directory /mirror and to put in it a directory /mirror/debian, but when
> I read FHS, I started wondering if I might be creat
* martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> also sprach Paul E Condon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.17.0056 +0100]:
... Where should "real work" stuff go within the FHS? I wonder...
>
> /home. you should not use anything else for work. everything else is
>
also sprach Paul E Condon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.17.0056 +0100]:
> As an example: before I read the FHS, I set up a local mirror of the
> Debian packages using apt-move. I decided to create a root level
> directory /mirror and to put in it a directory /mirror/debian, but when
>
I'm not sure that this comment really applies to this post, but it does
apply to this thread:
/floppy and /mnt are an example of a more general question about FHS,
namely: What advise does it offer concerning where to put databases, web
server stuff, etc. ? In general there is the s
martin f krafft wrote:
> as others have said and suggested, i also rarely use /mnt. if i need a
> mount point, i'll quickly create one on the fly. i believe there are
> even versions of mount out there that don't need an existing directory.
> i just wrapped mount and umount it in scripts that crea
also sprach Erik Steffl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.16.2306 +0100]:
> if you have more then one temporarily mounted filesystem, where do you
> mount it? It does not make sense to have a mount point for one
> filesystem but not for few of them.
as others have said and suggested, i also rarely us
' to these
> > directories. I removed them to make '/' cleaner.
>
> which is exactly the point, and which violates the FHS:
>
> section 3.11: "/mnt : Mount point for a temporarily mounted filesystem"
> ^
>
- Original Message -
From: "Thomas Sippel - Dau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "martin f krafft" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Debian User List" ;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 08:46
Subject: Re: Debian, FHS & /floppy
[snip
; > another partition on /mnt. byebye cdrom, byebye floppy.
>
> Yes I know. I just use '/mnt' as a directory which contains directories for
> all mountable peripherals. Before, I haved symbolic links in '/' to these
> directories. I removed them to make '/&#
Le 2002.01.16 16:17, martin f krafft a écrit :
> exaclty. but say you have /mnt/cdrom and /mnt/floppy, and both mounted,
> and now you want to make proper use of what /mnt is, and you mount
> another partition on /mnt. byebye cdrom, byebye floppy.
>
Yes I know. I just use '/mnt' as a directory wh
also sprach Romuald DELAVERGNE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.16.1501 +0100]:
> Yes but if you want to mount several peripherals at the same moment, '/mnt'
> is not enough.
exaclty. but say you have /mnt/cdrom and /mnt/floppy, and both mounted,
and now you want to make proper use of what /mnt is, an
Le 2002.01.16 14:43, martin f krafft a écrit :
>
> but /mnt *is* the mount point. noone objects if you moung your floppy
> on /mnt, but i object, as do many others, if you mount on /mnt/floppy.
>
Yes but if you want to mount several peripherals at the same moment, '/mnt'
is not enough.
also sprach Romuald DELAVERGNE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.16.1011 +0100]:
> Le 2002.01.15 11:06, martin f krafft a écrit :
> > then, look at section 3.11:
> > "/mnt : Mount point for a temporarily mounted filesystem"
> >
>
> For me, floppy or cdrom are always temporarily mounted.
Le 2002.01.15 11:06, martin f krafft a écrit :
> then, look at section 3.11:
> "/mnt : Mount point for a temporarily mounted filesystem"
>
For me, floppy or cdrom are always temporarily mounted.
Romuald.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 10:15:37AM -0800, ben wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 January 2002 06:30 am, John Hasler wrote:
> [snip]
> > A better fix would be adding a directory to contain mount points for
> > removable filesystems. The FHS should not mention specific types of
> >
On Tuesday 15 January 2002 06:30 am, John Hasler wrote:
[snip]
> A better fix would be adding a directory to contain mount points for
> removable filesystems. The FHS should not mention specific types of
> hardware.
why not?
ben wrote:
> i agree. it was one of the pleasures of discovering debian to find that
> something i had always considered redundant was not employed in the debian
> filesystem. why shouldn't floppies and other removable media be visible at
> the root level?
Conversly, what is so important about
ng done by some already -- e.g. /mnt/cdrom). However, IIRC
> > this didn't make up in FHS 2.2 because there were no consensus about
> > the _name_ that should be reserved to that directory. Some proposed
> > names I remember were /vol, /misc, and /media (I'm sure there we
also sprach Flavio Veloso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.15.1551 +0100]:
> This already was discussed on the FHS-discuss mailing list.
i am sorry, i could not find it in the archives. i am now subscribed,
this shan't happen again...
> The main argument against placing such direc
On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, martin f krafft wrote:
> i am writing to you, spawned by a thread we are having on the debian-user
> mailing list[1]. it's basically addressing the lack of inclusion of mount
> points like /floppy and /cdrom in the FHS. even though the FHS prohibits
>
ss. first of all, please
> > show me where the FHS supposedly dictates those two mount points into
> > /mnt?
> > then, look at section 3.11:
> > "/mnt : Mount point for a temporarily mounted filesystem"
> > and that's exactly what it's for. so you
Paul E Condon writes:
> I think the appearance of prohibition is really a problem of wording in
> the FHS. It might be fixed by adding /cdrom, and /floppy to the list of
> things that may be put in /.
A better fix would be adding a directory to contain mount points for
removable filesyst
Dear FHS people,
i am writing to you, spawned by a thread we are having on the debian-user
mailing list[1]. it's basically addressing the lack of inclusion of mount
points like /floppy and /cdrom in the FHS. even though the FHS prohibits
placing *anything* (directories actually) into /
martin f krafft wrote:
>
> also sprach Andras Simonyi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.14.1733 +0100]:
> > I can't help asking this concerning Debian's FHS compliance: why on
> > earth make all the Debian-versions the mount-points of removable media
> > in th
On Tuesday 15 January 2002 02:06 am, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Andras Simonyi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.14.1733 +0100]:
> > I can't help asking this concerning Debian's FHS compliance: why on
> > earth make all the Debian-versions the mount-points of
also sprach Andras Simonyi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.14.1733 +0100]:
> I can't help asking this concerning Debian's FHS compliance: why on
> earth make all the Debian-versions the mount-points of removable media
> in the root directory instead of /mnt/, which is the r
Hello,
I can't help asking this concerning Debian's FHS compliance: why on
earth make all the Debian-versions the mount-points of removable media
in the root directory instead of /mnt/, which is the required standard
in FHS? Of course I can change /cdrom and /floppy to /mnt/cdrom etc,
y new
packages produced by this new version of alien (in Incoming) will have
anything in those directories moved to FHS complient locations. This is
handy, since there are plenty of non-FHS-complient rpms and stuff out
there.
The upshot is that if you want to complete the /usr/man and /usr/do
Hi!
I´m gonna get security a bit up and set up bind chroot()ed.
No big deal, actually, but I want to conform with the FHS on that and
can´t quite figure out where I´d put the chroot in my "normal"
FS-hierarchy. Right now it resides in /var/local/bind, ´cause that´s
my best gu
.
> I've had a look at some FHS info and am still unclear where
> the preferred location for my data is, and what the implications
> are for partitioning disks.
User data goes in your home directory. Make /home big enough to
handle all of it.
--
With the arrest of Dimitry Sklyarov
llection of image files, as well as accounting stuff, metadata on
> image files, directories for client projects etc.
>
> I've had a look at some FHS info and am still unclear where
> the preferred location for my data is, and what the implications
> are for partitioning disk
jects etc.
I've had a look at some FHS info and am still unclear where
the preferred location for my data is, and what the implications
are for partitioning disks.
I prefer not to restructure later on.
I would appreciate any help on how to set up for flexibility
in backing up, upgrading hard
On Tue, Jul 28, 1998 at 01:15:05PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 1998 at 12:11:30AM -0400, Shaleh wrote:
> > As I recall, the FHS states that lib dirs are for libs (what you define
> > a lib could be up for a debate) only. Someone care to wave the FHS
> > u
On Tue, Jul 28, 1998 at 12:11:30AM -0400, Shaleh wrote:
> As I recall, the FHS states that lib dirs are for libs (what you define
> a lib could be up for a debate) only. Someone care to wave the FHS
> under my nose and show me wrong (-:
I think this has to do with the fact that we now
As I recall, the FHS states that lib dirs are for libs (what you define
a lib could be up for a debate) only. Someone care to wave the FHS
under my nose and show me wrong (-:
--
Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
On Mon, Jul 27, 1998 at 11:45:32PM -0400, Shaleh wrote:
> 1) /usr/local is fair game -- do as you wish.
>
> 2) ANY lib directory is WRONG for anything but libs.
>
> /usr/local/pix is a good choice. Or if you must: /usr/local/share/pix
> or bgs.
>
I disagree with #2 -- /usr/lib has many directo
1) /usr/local is fair game -- do as you wish.
2) ANY lib directory is WRONG for anything but libs.
/usr/local/pix is a good choice. Or if you must: /usr/local/share/pix
or bgs.
--
Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
I have some nice images that I have setup as the default desktop
background in X (the default image for the root window) on my system.
I was wondering if anyone knows the correct, FHS-compliant place to
store these? I was thinking something as in "/usr/local/lib" or
something of s
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
