On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 at 18:00, Chris Punches
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Monday 2022-12-12 18:46, Chris Punches wrote:
But even worse would be, if we would change the path of established upstream projects, like dbus. This would make us just incompatible with the rest of the world without any benefit That's why the FHS standard exists in the first place. It's not up to upstream projects where files go on the system. It is up to the distribution maintainers and packagers to maintain FHS compliance to avoid such issues. https://kubic.opensuse.org/blog/2019-12-05-usr-etc/
That explains it. It looks like SUSE has indeed abandoned the FHS by policy.
Yes and no. FHS is still valid for us, it's seriously though not the be all and end all of filesystem organisation as it used to be. FHS 3.0 (of 2015) is firstly not 100% correct anyway they tried to change things from earlier releases that would cause issues hence EVERYONE ignored some of what they call 'requirements' (/etc/adjtime to /var/lib as an example). The make up of a Linux system has changed since 2015 but they haven't updated the document. These changes we are doing also do not break the basic /etc and /usr requirements even if FHS said no to /usr/etc because the admin conf file will still reside in /etc, only the vendor (openSUSE) copy will reside in /usr.
Sad to hear, as that means standards spread will eventually make it wholly incompatible with the rest of the world, a concern previously expressed by Thorsten Kukuk earlier in the thread as somehow the very justification for standards spread.
No you're entirely missing the point, following FHS 3.0 entirely in 2022 would CAUSE issues for us and our users, not fix them. The upstreams decided where they want the files to be located and really as long as they don't get stupid (and say put conf files in /usr/bin), the locations they chose are fine logically.
!
I'm ducking out of SUSE and this will be the last of my participation. I just had to tell a thread full of accomplished linux engineers why open standards are important, after being told that the manpage which cites FHS 3.0 as its source is not FHS. This entire thread is nonsense and you can all do better.
This isn't about open standards, it's about an outdated one. Systemd says that because it's telling you hey us and FHS don't agree with each other because FHS no longer makes sense for how we want you to understand how systemd is being designed. You are saying this will lead to us being different from everyone else, it will not because it is written in the upstream documentation such as dbus-1, pam and systemd (example: https://dbus.freedesktop.org/doc/dbus-daemon.1.html)
I get that standards are hard, but the solution to people not being able to track standards is not to abandon them -- it's to train people to do better and for teams to hold each other accountable.
Some of my replies got lost due to Gmail changing from my openSUSE address to my personal address and hence they got rejected by the mail bot. But this reply allows me to express all of them so here they are. -- Callum Farmer gmbr3@opensuse.org openSUSE - gmbr3