[crux-devel] meeting notes & next IRC Meeting

Johannes Winkelmann jw at smts.ch
Mon May 29 12:19:04 UTC 2006


Hi,

On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 14:36:28 +0300, Mikhail Kolesnik wrote:
> On Mon, 29 May 2006 11:38:17 +0200
> Mark Rosenstand <mark at borkware.net> wrote:
> 
> > I'll suggest something like the FreeBSD install set selections, except
> > for the top-level profiles ("Developer desktop" etc.), so instead of
> > having all packages in one list, there'd be something like:
> > 
> > [x] core -->
> > [ ] opt -->
> > [ ] xorg -->
[...]
> Wouldn't it be confusing to list xorg as top-level option? We have core,
> ort and opt/x11 in it... while list it separately. As far as I
> remember, BSD's have independent Xblah.tgz 
The practical issue here is that 'xorg' stands for 100+ ports, therefore
it _must_ be a group. This is why I didn't call it core/opt/xorg in my
original mail, I agree it's confusing otherwise. It's an implementation
detail, though.


> I would also like to see the discussion on services privileges
> separation, FHS compliance. I used Juergen's ports to make FHS like
> ports of apache, mysql, vsftpd with opportunity to create separate
> users for each... It works, so why not?
Well, "it works" is a rather weak argument, since "it works" already
now. Can you give us any convincing argument why you think CRUX would
benefit from (full) FHS compliance?

Regards, Johannes
-- 
Johannes Winkelmann              mailto:jw at smts.ch
Zurich, Switzerland              http://jw.smts.ch



More information about the crux-devel mailing list