Hardy+1 Idea: GoboLinux Filesystem Hierarchy?
atheoi at gmail.com
Wed Jan 9 19:42:43 UTC 2008
On Jan 9, 2008 5:15 AM, Guilherme Augusto <guilherme.augustus at gmail.com> wrote:
> What would improve by using Gobolinux filesystem hierarchy?
A little over a year ago SABDFL blogged on
A long, long time ago, packaging was an exciting idea. [...] Today,
these differences are just a hindrance. The fact that there are so
many divergent packaging systems in the free software world (and I
include the various *bsd's) is a waste of time and energy. [...] I'd
like to see us define distribution-neutral packaging that suits both
the source-heads and the distro-heads.
The GLFH sounds like a good way to create a standard package format
that can be easily layered over any *nix OS...
> On the other hand, if someone already uses Linux, he probably got used
> with the "normal" filesystem hierarchy. If it is someone's first time,
> wouldn't it be confused to have a filesystem in a way and every Forum, HOWTO
> and other help docs over the net telling how to do things with another
> filesystem hierarchy?
"the Unix paths [...] are actually there, but they are concealed from
view using the GoboHide kernel extension. This is for aesthetic
purposes only and purely optional" IOW, the old way of doing things
should still work.
Also, just as an aside, I find that if I need Ubuntu help, searching
for '[my problem] Linux' isn't nearly as helpful as '[my problem]
Ubuntu'. People will adapt, just as someone moving from KDE to Gnome
will adapt to the different apps and controls.
I don't think the GLFH should be rejected (just) because its
different; there would never be any progress if we do that ;)
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss