On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 08:55 -0500, inode0 wrote: > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 8:30 AM, seth vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 08:18 -0500, inode0 wrote: > > > Is Fedora committed to the FHS? Or is Red Hat still committed to it? > > > > > > The purpose was for root only programs of a certain class to be > > > located in /sbin for example but including non-root programs there > > > does muddy the experience for the end user. However I do think it is > > > cleaner to make those programs available to a user by means other than > > > adding /sbin to the default path of a normal user. A few links are > > > cheap. Would links for those in /usr/bin clash with the FHS? > > > > 1. The FHS makes no rules about the default PATH setting for users/root > > Oh, I did not mean to imply that it did. My minor objection to getting > rid of /sbin abstractly is that as a normal user I just don't really > want to be exposed to the programs I can't execute in a meaningful way > as a normal user. > > > 2. The FHS has no problems with symlinks for the files it requires > > in /sbin and /usr/sbin > > I was wondering about whether the FHS objected to "cross linking" > programs that are used by both root and normal users that reside in > /sbin with symlinks in /usr/bin which is in the user's path already?! Unless there's an addendum I missed they make no comments about it whatsoever. -sv -- Fedora-desktop-list mailing list Fedora-desktop-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-desktop-list
