[haiku-development] Re: [haiku-commits] Re: r40675 - in haiku/branches/features/package-management: build/jam build/scripts data/system/boot headers/os/storage src/system/boot/loader ...
- From: Oliver Tappe <zooey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 14:15:50 +0100
[redirected from haiku-commits for increased exposure]
On 2011-02-25 at 10:42:24 [+0100], Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> On 2011-02-25 at 00:22:31 [+0100], zooey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > First stab at adjusted filesystem layout for package management:
> > * adjusted find_directory() to move several folders into 'tree'
> > subdirectory (which will be populated by package-fs at a later
> > stage)
>
> Is "tree" the last word on this? Sorry, I know this naming discussion is
> tedious,
> but I find "tree" rather generic and unnecessarily technical. I believe
> "software"
> was proposed, which is less technical, but just as generic. How about
> "package-contents" or "extracted-packages"?
No, "tree" is not the last word on this (I explicitly added a respective
TODO to find_directory.cpp, but that probably wasn't visible in the commit
log mail).
I don't think that "package-contents" and "extracted-packages" are less
technical than "tree", on the contrary they concentrate on the fact that
their contents come from package-fs. That's one piece of information not
being expressed by "tree" or "software", but most of the time, one wouldn't
care where those files come from, I believe.
I chose 'tree' merely because it's short and I actually like the ring of
'common/tree' (the common tree, the system tree, ...)
But I'm basically open for anything else, too. I'd be glad if we could
settle this soon, though, as it would avoid having to rebuild all the
packages existing at that time (of which there currently is only one on my
local disk: gcc).
Anyway, here's the current list of candidates that I remember (all would
live in /boot/{system,common,home/config} next to the "packages" folder):
- "extracted-packages"
- "files"
- "package-contents"
- "software"
- "tree"
- "unpacked"
alternatively, the folder could live underneath "packages", which has the
advantage of expressing their connectedness:
- "packages/contents" (i.e. *.hpkg files live in "packages" and their
contents in the "contents" subfolder)
- "packages/unpacked"
Opinions?
I guess, if we can't reach majority consensus, we'll need a vote.
cheers,
Oliver
Other related posts:
