[10] in Locker Maintainers
Re: attaching lockers before use
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Greg Hudson)
Wed Nov 26 01:46:22 1997
To: Erik Nygren <nygren@MIT.EDU>
Cc: locker-maintainers@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 24 Nov 1997 21:26:22 EST."
<199711250226.VAA01645@zocalo.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 01:46:17 EST
From: Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU>
As Nathan noted, lockers(7) requires you to use /mit paths. It
certainly makes it much more likely that the contents of your locker
will be useful when mirrored elsewhere, which people really do.
> (On a much less important and even more religious note, it might be
> nice to have a convention for whether arch-independant files should
> go in locker/common, locker/share, locker/arch/common,
> locker/arch/share, or something else.)
There's no practical reason to standardize, unless you believe that
one side of the argument is Right (tm). I happen to believe that I am
Right, but other people don't seem to buy that. :)
(FTR, I believe in a top-level directory named "scripts", since I
think putting architecture-independent materials under a directory
named "arch" is terrible; arch/common is a self-contradicting path
prefix with minimal information content.)
