Re: AW: [MiNT] drive letters

[t150315@students.cc.tut.fi]

> MiNT is not "worse" or "better", than another OS. Its filesystem structure
> is not "worse" or "better". It is just different. We do not need adapting
> to Linux, because we do not develop Linux. We develop MiNT.

FHS is not not just Linux, it's a bit more widely accepted,
eg by BSD.  I don't see why we wouldn't want to make porting
majority of (future) open source easier?

Let's concider if we don't move to FHS:

* Increasing number of packages compile straight for FHS
  without modification.  Ie. because porting them to MiNT
  would be more work, there would be less new programs
  than with FHS adaption[1].

* Some programs will use FHS nevertheless, so you end up
  with programs using two different directory hierarchies
  anyway.
  
It IS a standard (very reasonable too, just read it :-)).


[1] Be happy that MiNT doesn't have such major changes
like linux has had:  a.out -> ELF,  libc -> glibc...
yikes!


	- Eero