| To: | cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Things todo before we announce |
| From: | "Andi Kleen" <ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 30 Mar 2000 11:21:30 +0200 |
| Cc: | nathans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <14562.44287.39273.95483R@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx on Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 07:25:19PM -0600 |
| References: | <200003291619.KAA22984@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mostek@xxxxxxx> <10003300954.ZM7142@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <14562.42090.314696.82332B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <10003301105.ZM7400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <14562.44287.39273.95483R@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 07:25:19PM -0600, cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > The point I was getting at: > We shouldn't pollute the system with stuff people can't > distinctly remove; not util xfs it more accecpted. > > A lot of people are going to try xfs initially but > not really do much with it. > > Giving people a distinct point to "blow stuff away" > is more conforting than the MS scheme of "replacing 80% of > your os now...." I think just doing a rpm/dpkg is preferable over /usr/xfs It makes it easy enough to blow stuff away. You can also make the rpm relocateable if you worry about the place (but /sbin is a fine default) -Andi |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Things todo before we announce, Andi Kleen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Things todo before we announce, Steve Lord |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Things todo before we announce, cattelan |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Things todo before we announce, Christopher C. Petro |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |