SLUG Mailing List Archives
Re: Distro Layout / Config Standards (was Re: [SLUG] Debian)
- To: marty <marty@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Distro Layout / Config Standards (was Re: [SLUG] Debian)
- From: Anand Kumria <wildfire@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed Sep 20 03:24:32 2000
- Cc: slug@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Reply-to: slug@xxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Mutt/1.2i
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 11:23:19PM +1100, marty wrote:
> > The only problem I have with some of the RH ones is that they DO NOT
> > stick to the standard config files, rather they create and modify
> > their own ones.
> One thing I find incredibly frustrating is the inability for things to be
> in a reliable place even within a single distro. I don't want to be
> caught out not RTFM before I post to slug ;) because the docs for a
> particular app are in /var/lib or something equally ridiculous.
> As for config files, they are generally easy to locate but, as was
> pointed out above, too many are particular to a distro, leaving you
> behind the 8 ball if you ever have to (god forbid ;) use a different
> Has anyone noticed any effects come from the Linux Standards push ?
Yes, some changes in the pipelines for most distros:
- standard set of runlevels (runlevel 4 is for local admin use).
2 is multiuser no network
3 is multiuser with NFS
5 is multiuser and graphical
7,8 and 9 not allocated
- defined set of exit code for init scripts
instead of printing [OK], [FAIL] or "Starting anac(h)ronistics cron: anacron"
an exit code will be returned, thus things like Aurora can be `done right' and will also work on multiple distros.
- the FHS
I'm not sure if any distro is actually in compliance with this but
most are compatible.
/usr/doc/ -> /usr/share/doc
actually a lot of things move into /usr/share
The other (major) thing would be the promotion of a single package format
as a `standard'. Initially that would have been .rpm but its popularity
has declined and I think they will likely punt this decision to a later