[haiku-development] AW: [haiku-development] Re: RFC: /usr symlink?
- From: "superstippi@xxxxxx" <superstippi@xxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 10:40:02 +0200
Hi, sorry for Top-posting.
If memory serves, usr stands for Unix Shared Resources. Nothing to do with User.
Best regards,
Stephan
----- Reply message -----
Von: "Julian Harnath" <julian.harnath@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
An: <haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Betreff: [haiku-development] Re: RFC: /usr symlink?
Datum: Fr., Okt. 11, 2013 09:46
Alexander von Gluck IV <kallisti5@xxxxxxxxxxx> schrieb:
> Thoughts?
I'd rather go the route of finding a different workaround, e.g. the
idea of adding it to runtime loader which is invisible to the user.
If we make the file system hierarchy *look* more like unix then people
coming from such systems will also expect it to *behave* more like it.
They might also expect that there's a /usr/share or /usr/doc and many
other things. Creating wrong expectations leads to confusion so I think
a workaround-solution which is invisible to the user is a better way to
handle it.
Last but not least, I don't like a symlink called "usr" to system files.
The name doesn't make sense. Why put system files in a directory name
abbreviated for "user"? (This [1] nice little text gives an explanation
of how "usr" ended up being what it is today and why it doesn't make
sense.)
For our /var at least, the name is fine, it's a place for files which
are variable. Although I'm not too fond of such abbrevations, at least
it makes sense. Same for /dev, /bin or /tmp. "etc" is a puzzling name
again - to this day, I'm not even sure what "etc" stands for. It always
reminds me of "et cetera" but that doesn't make sense... but well, we
have it and it's okay to keep it.
[1] http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html
--
So long, jua
Other related posts:
- » [haiku-development] AW: [haiku-development] Re: RFC: /usr symlink? - superstippi@xxxxxx
