Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 21:11:28 +0100 From: Frank Murphy <murphyf+fhs@f-m.fm> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: FreeBSD and FHS summary Message-ID: <200311252111.30988.murphyf%2Bfhs@f-m.fm> In-Reply-To: <20031121144116.A712D7E40E@server2.messagingengine.com> References: <20031121144116.A712D7E40E@server2.messagingengine.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Before going back to the FHS list, I'd like to summarize what I think the opinions here were. Please correct me if I'm horribly off-base. The idea of defining a default directory to hold directories for recurring temporary mount points is considered to be a good one, though it's use should be optional. Putting these in / would be a bad idea, because it would clutter up the root directory. Putting these in /mnt would be a bad idea because lots of people expect that directory to be empty to be used for temporary ad hoc mount points. Also, the FHS shouldn't try to define all the names of these mount point directories. Putting this directory into /usr, /tmp, or any of the other well-defined top-level directories doesn't make any sense. But perhaps a directory in /var would be a good idea, but some people thought that it sounded wierd, and there were some technical [1] reasons [2] why it might be a bad idea. Some recommended top-level directories were: /fs, /tfs, /mounts, /volumes, /mnts [1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=freebsd-questions&m=106943623518140&w=2 [2] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=freebsd-questions&m=106976168210773&w=2 If anyone thinks I would be misrepresenting the discussion, please let me know. Frank
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200311252111.30988.murphyf%2Bfhs>