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

Re: Dir structure rough text version call for feedback.

Dan Smith wrote:

Rahul, thank you on the feedback. FHS? I documented based on default Fedora installs.

Yes and that follows the FHS standard hierarchy at http://www.pathname.com/fhs/. For administrators, pointing to the standard and describing exceptionns would be much better.

The exceptions were purely commonly installed tarballs.
I did not go into detail such as WHERE the files might be found. Only pointed out that they might be in a different place. That's what I was talking about style however. Whether such practical usage tips were appropriate for the document. Apache in particuler is probably more frequently installed by tarball than by rpm. One of the biggest driving factors is that when a patch comes out it can be days or weeks before an RPM comes out where the tarball is the official means of release. Tarballs also offer a great deal of customization not easy or possible with the current rpm configuration. So I thought it was important to document that.

Encouraging the usage of tarballs is generally a bad idea. It creates maintenance problems on security issues, upgrades etc. In general, for security issues or critical bugs, Fedora would prioritize provide a update within a few days. Even if customization is required, patching and rebuilding source RPMS is much better than sticking tarballs into the system.

I will delve into more details about /etc/issue files. Any other areas I did not cover well or need more detail?

There are similar documents elsewhere which could be referenced for ideas. Example, the filesystem guide at http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-5-manual/index.html


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