Re: [rox-devel] Re: [rox-users] Debian packages

[Filip V. R. <mec...@de...>]

On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 11:57:21AM +0100, Thomas Leonard wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 05:49:45PM +0200, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> > 
> >   Let I wrote few words :) I used next operating systems:
> > 
> > 1. AmigaOS 2.04/3.x
> > 2. Microsoft Windows 3.x and all upper versions
> > 3. Linux/XFree86 with  GNOME 1.x, tried KDE 1/2/3, Enlightment 0.16
> 
> So not RISC OS, NeXT or MacOS X, then?

Does MacOS 9 count? I'll stick to the cliché argument: I wouldn't say an
OS which requires you to move an icon to a trashcan to eject a cdrom
demonstrates a good design.

> > In each of those enviroments when I doubleclick on directory icon I get
> > it open and may look what is inside.
> 
> But this argument applies equally to all executables. Eg, when you
> double-click a file icon it opens in a text editor and you see what's
> inside. With ROX-Filer, you have to wonder - will it be executable (maybe
> with 'nice' "rm -rf /" like thing). Of course, you can spot this by the
> fact that it's coloured as an executable. As with an executable directory,
> you must Shift+Click to look inside. So what's the difference?

Well, for one thing - it's (only slightly) harder to perform an rm -rf
from an executable. While just about anyone can stick an AppRun with rm
-rf in a directory, and claim it's program frot which is used to frot
icons with (whatever that may mean :-)

Second, don't look at it as installed applications. Look at an AppDir as
a just extracted tarball. I want to take a look inside first before I
run it. The default way to deal with it is to immediately run it. It
shouldn't be.

Third, I'm paranoid and I don't install binaries which are not supplied
by my vendor [1].
Before I compile I want once again take a look inside the directory tree
first, and even check the makefile (or equivalent). Again the default
action is to immediately compile.
Assume I don't mind immediate compilation, if something goes wrong I
have to pull tricks again to go into the AppDir and find out what's
wrong.

So, I don't quite like AppDir either, as you may have noticed. Just
removing it may be a bit blunt, but assuming a solution is eventually
provided for the features which that breaks and which do make sense, it
creates a better ROX Filer at least and ROX DE even, IMO. [2]


Regards,

Filip

[1] not 100% true; I do own a number of Loki games. Those are the only
    non-vendor supplied binaries though.

[2] I can't say any of the arguments called upon in favour of AppDir can
    convince me even without the arguments against. There are other
    solutions for every one of them, which fit in a lot better with the
    Unix style of doing things.
    The only true advantage is IMO the extended attributes given to
    applications, and those are very likely at least in Linux to come
    built into the filesystem in the next major kernel release.

-- 
> I wasn't aware that BSD license was so short, i assumed it was
> loong like GPL and friends.
No, BSD folks got other things to do than write licences. *duck*
	-- Arthur Korn