On Wed, 2013-08-07 at 11:35 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Ondrej Vasik (ovasik@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > Now I probably see why I did that - it was in the RPM_BUILD_ROOT from > > some reason and because of the capabilities change, I needed to > > explicitly mention all directories created in RPM_BUILD_ROOT. So this > > commit just exposed /usr/etc explicitly what was in the package payload > > since at least 2004 (I don't have older data). If noone knows why this > > directory should exist, I'll be more than happy to drop it... > > Yeah, it's always been in there back to 1998, at least. It came from > FSSTND (the FHS precursor): > http://ibiblio.org/pub/linux/docs/fsstnd/old/fsstnd-1.2.txt > > ... > > 4.5 /usr/etc : Site-wide system configuration > > Storing configuration in /usr/etc for the software found in /usr/bin and > /usr/sbin is a problem. It makes the read-only mounting of /usr through > CD-ROM or NFS delivery very difficult at best. > > One possible solution that we considered was to completely eliminate > /usr/etc and specify that all configuration be stored in /etc. A > problem with this approach is that it does not properly anticipate the > possibility that many sites may want to have some configuration files > that are not machine-local. > > We eventually decided that /etc should be the only directory that is > actually referenced by programs (that is, everything should look for > configuration in /etc and not in /usr/etc). Any configuration files > that need to be site-wide and are not needed before /usr is mounted (or > in an emergency situation) should then be placed in /usr/etc. Then, > specific files (in /etc) on specific machines may or may not be > symbolically linked to appropriate configuration files located in > /usr/etc. This also means that /usr/etc is technically an optional > directory in the strictest sense, but we still recommend that all Linux > systems incorporate it. > > It is not recommended for /usr/etc to contain symbolic links that point > to files in /etc. This is unnecessary and interferes with local control > on machines that share a /usr directory. > ... > > It (and /usr/local/etc) were dropped in FHS 2.1 in 2001. So... nuke it? I already nuked /usr/etc yesterday - as FHS even disallows it (see http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#USRLOCALLOCALHIERARCHY Rationale note). But I still see /usr/local/etc there - and mentioned as beneficial, so keeping it for now. Greetings, Ondrej -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
