Dir structure rough text version call for feedback.
Rahul Sundaram
sundaram at fedoraproject.org
Fri Dec 8 09:29:13 UTC 2006
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
Rahul
More information about the fedora-docs-list
mailing list