Thread: [Simplygnustep-discuss] Here's a strange one
Status: Alpha
Brought to you by:
cehardin
Menu
▾
▴
simplygnustep-discuss
|
From: <ceh...@ma...> - 2003-04-16 06:54:04
|
I was just wondering... why the heck do we have any need for the /usr directory at all? Prometheus is designed to be easy to use, and that means no complicated partitioning. The primary reason we have a /usr at all is because traditionally unix setups have heavily partitioned disks/mountings. But Prometheus avoids that. So, why not just have all the directories in / ? that would mean /share and /man would be in / too, obviously. Beside being "odd", why not do this? Is there any technical reason we can not do this? I think that it would be easier for the user to grasp the system if it was done this way. Input? Chad |
|
From: Peter-Henry M. <gn...@ma...> - 2003-04-16 07:27:01
|
As long as *NIX style programs aren't too fussy about having a symlink from /usr to / (-: I dunno, you may run aground due to compatibility problems. And being "odd" can get you strange looks! From an acceptance point of view, perhaps the symlink would smooth the way. Pete. ceh...@ma... wrote: > I was just wondering... > > why the heck do we have any need for the /usr directory at all? > Prometheus is designed to be easy to use, and that means no complicated > partitioning. The primary reason we have a /usr at all is because > traditionally unix setups have heavily partitioned disks/mountings. But > Prometheus avoids that. > > So, why not just have all the directories in / ? that would mean /share > and /man would be in / too, obviously. Beside being "odd", why not do > this? > > > Is there any technical reason we can not do this? I think that it would > be easier for the user to grasp the system if it was done this way. > > Input? > > Chad > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list > Sim...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss > > |
|
From: <ceh...@ma...> - 2003-04-16 08:00:30
|
Yes, the symlink would be an easy answer I suppose. It would also go on forever (/usr -> /->/usr -> /->/usr), but that may not be a problem. Since we have a pretty narrow scope of what software will be in the distro (gnustep and the bare essentials to get gnustep running), then we shouldn't have to worry about too much compatibility probs (I would hope) So is this a vote "yes"? Chad On Tuesday, Apr 15, 2003, at 21:41 Pacific/Honolulu, Peter-Henry Mander wrote: > As long as *NIX style programs aren't too fussy about having a symlink > from /usr to / (-: > > I dunno, you may run aground due to compatibility problems. And being > "odd" can get you strange looks! From an acceptance point of view, > perhaps the symlink would smooth the way. > > Pete. > > ceh...@ma... wrote: >> I was just wondering... >> why the heck do we have any need for the /usr directory at all? >> Prometheus is designed to be easy to use, and that means no >> complicated partitioning. The primary reason we have a /usr at all >> is because traditionally unix setups have heavily partitioned >> disks/mountings. But Prometheus avoids that. >> So, why not just have all the directories in / ? that would mean >> /share and /man would be in / too, obviously. Beside being "odd", >> why not do this? >> Is there any technical reason we can not do this? I think that it >> would be easier for the user to grasp the system if it was done this >> way. >> Input? >> Chad >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek >> Welcome to geek heaven. >> http://thinkgeek.com/sf >> _______________________________________________ >> Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list >> Sim...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss > > > |
|
From: Peter-Henry M. <gn...@ma...> - 2003-04-16 08:40:45
|
You could symlink from / to the directories in /usr, just to proceed in stages. Otherwise, yes, I don't have any major objections, so lets try the experiment (-: Any 3rd party install scripts worth their salt should be able to --prefix at the ./configure stage anyway. This may be my only minor niggle, the "user" may find installing new software isn't just a ./configure; make install job anymore. The /usr symlink may be a requirement, or the user will have to RTFM, which ain't a bad thing as long as there's a FM to hand. So, yes. Pete. ceh...@ma... wrote: > Yes, the symlink would be an easy answer I suppose. It would also go on > forever (/usr -> /->/usr -> /->/usr), but that may not be a problem. > > Since we have a pretty narrow scope of what software will be in the > distro (gnustep and the bare essentials to get gnustep running), then we > shouldn't have to worry about too much compatibility probs (I would hope) > > So is this a vote "yes"? > > > Chad > > > On Tuesday, Apr 15, 2003, at 21:41 Pacific/Honolulu, Peter-Henry Mander > wrote: > >> As long as *NIX style programs aren't too fussy about having a symlink >> from /usr to / (-: >> >> I dunno, you may run aground due to compatibility problems. And being >> "odd" can get you strange looks! From an acceptance point of view, >> perhaps the symlink would smooth the way. >> >> Pete. >> >> ceh...@ma... wrote: >> >>> I was just wondering... >>> why the heck do we have any need for the /usr directory at all? >>> Prometheus is designed to be easy to use, and that means no >>> complicated partitioning. The primary reason we have a /usr at all >>> is because traditionally unix setups have heavily partitioned >>> disks/mountings. But Prometheus avoids that. >>> So, why not just have all the directories in / ? that would mean >>> /share and /man would be in / too, obviously. Beside being "odd", >>> why not do this? >>> Is there any technical reason we can not do this? I think that it >>> would be easier for the user to grasp the system if it was done this >>> way. >>> Input? >>> Chad >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek >>> Welcome to geek heaven. >>> http://thinkgeek.com/sf >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list >>> Sim...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss >> >> >> >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list > Sim...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss > > |
|
From: Frank D. E. Jr. <fd...@ya...> - 2003-04-16 12:16:17
|
Actually, from some books I've read lately, /usr was also the original location of home directories. So if I have login ID 'fde101', my home directory would be /usr/fde101. This is in addition to the other directories! There is no harm in having a /usr in the filesystem, nor should it be a problem to have it as a symlink, but the directory structure would be a bit more comprehensible if you left it as a separate directory. And BTW, some UNIX systems, such as IRIX, already do some strange things to the directory structure. Home directories under IRIX are, for ex., /usr/people/fde101. /bin is a symlink to /usr/bin (!). And don't even ask about package systems... NetBSD stores most packages' files under the /usr/pkg heiarchy, and IRIX freeware packages (freeware.sgi.com) tend to be under either /usr/freeware or /usr/gnu (!!). Most *NIX programs (particularly open source ones) are generally quite flexible about all of this. If placing users' home directories under /Users, however (this is where OS X does it, and I think I saw that SGS is as well, correct?), I would suggest something like /Users/Common to replace /usr/share, rather than just /share... Or /Library/share? There is often a --prefix-share, or something similar, for most of the common ./configure scripts, for most of the directories. Prob. best to keep the number of subdirectories directly off the root to a reasonable minimum if you wish to maintain usability. If eliminating /usr, then just dump it; someone who needs it can always create it themselves later on (mkdir /usr; ln -s /Users/Common /usr/share; ln -s /bin /usr/bin; mkdir /usr/etc; ln -s /sbin /usr/sbin; etc...) --- Peter-Henry Mander <gn...@ma...> wrote: > You could symlink from / to the directories in /usr, just to proceed > in > stages. > > Otherwise, yes, I don't have any major objections, so lets try the > experiment (-: Any 3rd party install scripts worth their salt should > be > able to --prefix at the ./configure stage anyway. > > This may be my only minor niggle, the "user" may find installing new > software isn't just a ./configure; make install job anymore. The /usr > > symlink may be a requirement, or the user will have to RTFM, which > ain't > a bad thing as long as there's a FM to hand. > > So, yes. > > Pete. > > ceh...@ma... wrote: > > Yes, the symlink would be an easy answer I suppose. It would also > go on > > forever (/usr -> /->/usr -> /->/usr), but that may not be a > problem. > > > > Since we have a pretty narrow scope of what software will be in the > > > distro (gnustep and the bare essentials to get gnustep running), > then we > > shouldn't have to worry about too much compatibility probs (I would > hope) > > > > So is this a vote "yes"? > > > > > > Chad > > > > > > On Tuesday, Apr 15, 2003, at 21:41 Pacific/Honolulu, Peter-Henry > Mander > > wrote: > > > >> As long as *NIX style programs aren't too fussy about having a > symlink > >> from /usr to / (-: > >> > >> I dunno, you may run aground due to compatibility problems. And > being > >> "odd" can get you strange looks! From an acceptance point of view, > > >> perhaps the symlink would smooth the way. > >> > >> Pete. > >> > >> ceh...@ma... wrote: > >> > >>> I was just wondering... > >>> why the heck do we have any need for the /usr directory at all? > >>> Prometheus is designed to be easy to use, and that means no > >>> complicated partitioning. The primary reason we have a /usr at > all > >>> is because traditionally unix setups have heavily partitioned > >>> disks/mountings. But Prometheus avoids that. > >>> So, why not just have all the directories in / ? that would mean > > >>> /share and /man would be in / too, obviously. Beside being > "odd", > >>> why not do this? > >>> Is there any technical reason we can not do this? I think that > it > >>> would be easier for the user to grasp the system if it was done > this > >>> way. > >>> Input? > >>> Chad > >>> ------------------------------------------------------- > >>> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > >>> Welcome to geek heaven. > >>> http://thinkgeek.com/sf > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list > >>> Sim...@li... > >>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > > Welcome to geek heaven. > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > > _______________________________________________ > > Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list > > Sim...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list > Sim...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss ===== ======= Frank D. Engel, Jr. Modify the equilibrium of the vertically-oriented particle decelerator to result in the reestablishment of its resistance to counterproductive atmospheric penetration. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo http://search.yahoo.com |
|
From: <ceh...@ma...> - 2003-04-17 03:32:19
|
On Wednesday, Apr 16, 2003, at 02:16 Pacific/Honolulu, Frank D. Engel, Jr. wrote: > Actually, from some books I've read lately, /usr was also the original > location of home directories. So if I have login ID 'fde101', my home > directory would be /usr/fde101. This is in addition to the other > directories! Yes, I remember this from the old, pre linux days. didn't minix do this? > > There is no harm in having a /usr in the filesystem, nor should it be a > problem to have it as a symlink, but the directory structure would be a > bit more comprehensible if you left it as a separate directory. And > BTW, some UNIX systems, such as IRIX, already do some strange things to > the directory structure. i don't want to do anything to strange, I still want to keep the structure the same, just in / instead of /usr. Hopefully, all it will take for most software is to just do a ./configure --prefix=/ I do know that some ./configure scripts will only look for certain progs in /usr/bin however, so a symlink will have to be there. > > Home directories under IRIX are, for ex., /usr/people/fde101. /bin is > a symlink to /usr/bin (!). Prometheus will be /Users/chad. There will be symlink from /home to /Users to make the transition easy. (/home will be hidden by use the .hidden file, as will /bin, /lib, /dev, /etc) > > And don't even ask about package systems... NetBSD stores most > packages' files under the /usr/pkg heiarchy, and IRIX freeware packages > (freeware.sgi.com) tend to be under either /usr/freeware or /usr/gnu > (!!). I was thinking of using /var/packages for the admin data of the installed packages. > > Most *NIX programs (particularly open source ones) are generally quite > flexible about all of this. If placing users' home directories under > /Users, however (this is where OS X does it, and I think I saw that SGS > is as well, correct?), I would suggest something like /Users/Common to > replace /usr/share, rather than just /share... Well, I want to avoid this kinda thing. The reason is that it will probably involved making all kinds of patches for the software to get it to work using "customized" directories such as this. BTW, the LinuxStep project is doing just this. They're directory structure has NO traditional directories. There is no /bin, /dev, /proc, /etc and such. They have to maintain lots and lots of patches to accomplish this and I think that creating and maintaining such patches would be too time consuming. It is far easier to simply hide the "Non Gnustep" directories, as OpenStep and OS X do. > > Or /Library/share? > > There is often a --prefix-share, or something similar, for most of the > common ./configure scripts, for most of the directories. True, but where will it end, there are many other directories we can do this to as well, but then we end up with above problem. > > Prob. best to keep the number of subdirectories directly off the root > to a reasonable minimum if you wish to maintain usability. Why? I do admit that since there will only be one /bin, /sbin, /lib, etc that they will contain many more files in them. But is this really a problem? Prometheus, by default, hides all these directories from the user anyhow. Do you know of any potential technical problems from doing it this way? Better to find out now than later! > If > eliminating /usr, then just dump it; someone who needs it can always > create it themselves later on (mkdir /usr; ln -s /Users/Common > /usr/share; ln -s /bin /usr/bin; mkdir /usr/etc; ln -s /sbin /usr/sbin; > etc...) The problem we get to is that many scripts (./configure included) expect certain progs in /usr/bin. > > --- Peter-Henry Mander <gn...@ma...> wrote: > Thanks Peter! Chad |
|
From: <ceh...@ma...> - 2003-04-17 03:33:14
|
I mean, thanks Frank! :-) On Wednesday, Apr 16, 2003, at 02:16 Pacific/Honolulu, Frank D. Engel, Jr. wrote: > Actually, from some books I've read lately, /usr was also the original > location of home directories. So if I have login ID 'fde101', my home > directory would be /usr/fde101. This is in addition to the other > directories! > > There is no harm in having a /usr in the filesystem, nor should it be a > problem to have it as a symlink, but the directory structure would be a > bit more comprehensible if you left it as a separate directory. And > BTW, some UNIX systems, such as IRIX, already do some strange things to > the directory structure. > > Home directories under IRIX are, for ex., /usr/people/fde101. /bin is > a symlink to /usr/bin (!). > > And don't even ask about package systems... NetBSD stores most > packages' files under the /usr/pkg heiarchy, and IRIX freeware packages > (freeware.sgi.com) tend to be under either /usr/freeware or /usr/gnu > (!!). > > Most *NIX programs (particularly open source ones) are generally quite > flexible about all of this. If placing users' home directories under > /Users, however (this is where OS X does it, and I think I saw that SGS > is as well, correct?), I would suggest something like /Users/Common to > replace /usr/share, rather than just /share... > > Or /Library/share? > > There is often a --prefix-share, or something similar, for most of the > common ./configure scripts, for most of the directories. > > Prob. best to keep the number of subdirectories directly off the root > to a reasonable minimum if you wish to maintain usability. If > eliminating /usr, then just dump it; someone who needs it can always > create it themselves later on (mkdir /usr; ln -s /Users/Common > /usr/share; ln -s /bin /usr/bin; mkdir /usr/etc; ln -s /sbin /usr/sbin; > etc...) > > --- Peter-Henry Mander <gn...@ma...> wrote: >> You could symlink from / to the directories in /usr, just to proceed >> in >> stages. >> >> Otherwise, yes, I don't have any major objections, so lets try the >> experiment (-: Any 3rd party install scripts worth their salt should >> be >> able to --prefix at the ./configure stage anyway. >> >> This may be my only minor niggle, the "user" may find installing new >> software isn't just a ./configure; make install job anymore. The /usr >> >> symlink may be a requirement, or the user will have to RTFM, which >> ain't >> a bad thing as long as there's a FM to hand. >> >> So, yes. >> >> Pete. >> >> ceh...@ma... wrote: >>> Yes, the symlink would be an easy answer I suppose. It would also >> go on >>> forever (/usr -> /->/usr -> /->/usr), but that may not be a >> problem. >>> >>> Since we have a pretty narrow scope of what software will be in the >> >>> distro (gnustep and the bare essentials to get gnustep running), >> then we >>> shouldn't have to worry about too much compatibility probs (I would >> hope) >>> >>> So is this a vote "yes"? >>> >>> >>> Chad >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, Apr 15, 2003, at 21:41 Pacific/Honolulu, Peter-Henry >> Mander >>> wrote: >>> >>>> As long as *NIX style programs aren't too fussy about having a >> symlink >>>> from /usr to / (-: >>>> >>>> I dunno, you may run aground due to compatibility problems. And >> being >>>> "odd" can get you strange looks! From an acceptance point of view, >> >>>> perhaps the symlink would smooth the way. >>>> >>>> Pete. >>>> >>>> ceh...@ma... wrote: >>>> >>>>> I was just wondering... >>>>> why the heck do we have any need for the /usr directory at all? >>>>> Prometheus is designed to be easy to use, and that means no >>>>> complicated partitioning. The primary reason we have a /usr at >> all >>>>> is because traditionally unix setups have heavily partitioned >>>>> disks/mountings. But Prometheus avoids that. >>>>> So, why not just have all the directories in / ? that would mean >> >>>>> /share and /man would be in / too, obviously. Beside being >> "odd", >>>>> why not do this? >>>>> Is there any technical reason we can not do this? I think that >> it >>>>> would be easier for the user to grasp the system if it was done >> this >>>>> way. >>>>> Input? >>>>> Chad >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek >>>>> Welcome to geek heaven. >>>>> http://thinkgeek.com/sf >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list >>>>> Sim...@li... >>>>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek >>> Welcome to geek heaven. >>> http://thinkgeek.com/sf >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list >>> Sim...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek >> Welcome to geek heaven. >> http://thinkgeek.com/sf >> _______________________________________________ >> Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list >> Sim...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss > > > ===== > ======= > Frank D. Engel, Jr. > > Modify the equilibrium of the vertically-oriented particle decelerator > to result in the reestablishment of its resistance to > counterproductive atmospheric penetration. > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo > http://search.yahoo.com > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list > Sim...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss |
|
From: <ceh...@ma...> - 2003-04-17 03:34:59
|
Also, hopefully we can provide a good enough system so that the average user never feels the need to tinker down into such a level where they would ever even be exposed to the traditional unix layout. Chad On Tuesday, Apr 15, 2003, at 22:54 Pacific/Honolulu, Peter-Henry Mander wrote: > You could symlink from / to the directories in /usr, just to proceed > in stages. > > Otherwise, yes, I don't have any major objections, so lets try the > experiment (-: Any 3rd party install scripts worth their salt should > be able to --prefix at the ./configure stage anyway. > > This may be my only minor niggle, the "user" may find installing new > software isn't just a ./configure; make install job anymore. The /usr > symlink may be a requirement, or the user will have to RTFM, which > ain't a bad thing as long as there's a FM to hand. > > So, yes. > > Pete. > > ceh...@ma... wrote: >> Yes, the symlink would be an easy answer I suppose. It would also go >> on forever (/usr -> /->/usr -> /->/usr), but that may not be a >> problem. >> Since we have a pretty narrow scope of what software will be in the >> distro (gnustep and the bare essentials to get gnustep running), then >> we shouldn't have to worry about too much compatibility probs (I >> would hope) >> So is this a vote "yes"? >> Chad >> On Tuesday, Apr 15, 2003, at 21:41 Pacific/Honolulu, Peter-Henry >> Mander wrote: >>> As long as *NIX style programs aren't too fussy about having a >>> symlink from /usr to / (-: >>> >>> I dunno, you may run aground due to compatibility problems. And >>> being "odd" can get you strange looks! From an acceptance point of >>> view, perhaps the symlink would smooth the way. >>> >>> Pete. >>> >>> ceh...@ma... wrote: >>> >>>> I was just wondering... >>>> why the heck do we have any need for the /usr directory at all? >>>> Prometheus is designed to be easy to use, and that means no >>>> complicated partitioning. The primary reason we have a /usr at all >>>> is because traditionally unix setups have heavily partitioned >>>> disks/mountings. But Prometheus avoids that. >>>> So, why not just have all the directories in / ? that would mean >>>> /share and /man would be in / too, obviously. Beside being "odd", >>>> why not do this? >>>> Is there any technical reason we can not do this? I think that it >>>> would be easier for the user to grasp the system if it was done >>>> this way. >>>> Input? >>>> Chad >>>> ------------------------------------------------------- >>>> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek >>>> Welcome to geek heaven. >>>> http://thinkgeek.com/sf >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list >>>> Sim...@li... >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss >>> >>> >>> >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek >> Welcome to geek heaven. >> http://thinkgeek.com/sf >> _______________________________________________ >> Simplygnustep-discuss mailing list >> Sim...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simplygnustep-discuss > > > |
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X