| 1 |
On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 00:11:29 +0200, Alexandru Mincu wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I sent this earlier and it wasn't received so I resend it now... |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
It was received, but you didn't see it because you are using GMail, which |
| 6 |
treated it as a duplicate of the mail you'd sent. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> They are trying to remove the old UNIX file system scheme with the/bin |
| 9 |
> /etc /usr /var, etc directories and are trying to implement a little |
| 10 |
> more intuitive version of the file system hierarchy. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
There is no intuition involved in either, it's just a matter of what you |
| 13 |
are used to. Don't confuse "familiar" with "intuitive". |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> I know the opinions on this are shared and some people like the old |
| 16 |
> arrangement, but believe me I've seen lots of new users that come to |
| 17 |
> Linux and don't understand a thing from the file system arrangement. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Why should they? They are new users and as such wouldn't be expected to |
| 20 |
understand the intricacies of the filesystem. But that doesn't matter, |
| 21 |
the package manager takes care of putting files in the correct place and |
| 22 |
the desktop menus and icons take care of launching the programs from |
| 23 |
wherever they are. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> The compatibility problem can be solved by creating links for each |
| 26 |
> directory in the old scheme to a new one that contains links to |
| 27 |
> programs,libs,etc each in their place. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
What compatibility problem? Linux is different from Windows in this, and |
| 30 |
many other, more significant, regards, but Linux is not Windows. It is, |
| 31 |
by definition, different. Why should it jump through hoops and make life |
| 32 |
more difficult for developers, administrators and experienced users just |
| 33 |
to imitate a completely different OS's way of doing things. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Next you'll be advocating that Gentoo devs add spyware to programs to |
| 36 |
make it more like Windows... |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
> I think Gentoo has the power to give the user this choice, and since |
| 39 |
> Gentoo it's all about choices I think the developers here can make this |
| 40 |
> happen and make it well. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Or they can make the choice not to do this. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
> I propose a new USE flag or any other option that portage supports and |
| 45 |
> the modifications needed to install each program in it's directory and |
| 46 |
> create the links to their places. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Bear in mind that most of the work done by ebuilds is based on the |
| 49 |
upstream installation script. Staying close to upstream wherever possible |
| 50 |
is a basic principle. Your proposal would go against that and force |
| 51 |
developers to rewrite the install portion of every ebuild, as well as |
| 52 |
sending a message to the upstream devs that their method isn't good |
| 53 |
enough for Gentoo. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
another important question in this case is "who supports the software |
| 56 |
when it doesn't work properly?" Upstream devs would ignore bug reports |
| 57 |
from Gentoo users and devs because of the non-standard installation. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
> I want to ask the developer community if it is willing to put this in |
| 61 |
> practice and give the Gentoo users another choice to make their Linux |
| 62 |
> system the way they want it and like and understand it and not the way |
| 63 |
> others do or did. |
| 64 |
|
| 65 |
Did it ever occur to you that there are good reasons why so many others |
| 66 |
do it the way they do? |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
-- |
| 70 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 71 |
|
| 72 |
Ask a silly person, get a silly answer |
Archives