[gentoo-dev] little filesystem layout idea

[gentoo-dev] little filesystem layout idea

[Thomas Weidner]

What about the following:
instead of heaving /usr/X/Y, /usr/X/Y is a symlink to /usr/Y/X.
so /usr/qt/3/bin whould be a symlink to /usr/bin/qt/3.
the advantage? all binaries/libraries/headers/... are under a common 
subdirectory (/usr/bin,/usr/lib,/usr/include) and not spread in /usr.
This could be usable in network environments where 
/usr/bin,/usr/share,... are mounted as NFS export. (and it's closer to 
the FHS....).

bye Thomas

PS: sorry for bad english
PPS: i don't want another filesystem layout flame thread,it's just an 
idea....


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] little filesystem layout idea

[Nick Perry]

I fail the point in that. It's the opposite of what makes sense, i.e. putting symlinks in /usr/bin to programs in /usr/blah/bin, which allows easy execution of said programs without having a very long PATH variable and allows easy management of applications as they can be completely contained under their own directory tree.

Nick


On Thu, 05 Jun 2003 22:11:09 +0200
Thomas Weidner <yasea@gmx.net> wrote:

> What about the following:
> instead of heaving /usr/X/Y, /usr/X/Y is a symlink to /usr/Y/X.
> so /usr/qt/3/bin whould be a symlink to /usr/bin/qt/3.
> the advantage? all binaries/libraries/headers/... are under a common 
> subdirectory (/usr/bin,/usr/lib,/usr/include) and not spread in /usr.
> This could be usable in network environments where 
> /usr/bin,/usr/share,... are mounted as NFS export. (and it's closer to 
> the FHS....).
> 
> bye Thomas
> 
> PS: sorry for bad english
> PPS: i don't want another filesystem layout flame thread,it's just an 
> idea....
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] little filesystem layout idea

[Svyatogor]

May I ask you then what is the point of having a /usr/qt/3/bin symlink at all? 
The idea (as far as I understand) is that the programs are is spearate locations.
Expesially the one like qt, which stay in the place they were compiled.

On Thu, 05 Jun 2003 22:11:09 +0200
Thomas Weidner <yasea@gmx.net> wrote:

> What about the following:
> instead of heaving /usr/X/Y, /usr/X/Y is a symlink to /usr/Y/X.
> so /usr/qt/3/bin whould be a symlink to /usr/bin/qt/3.
> the advantage? all binaries/libraries/headers/... are under a common 
> subdirectory (/usr/bin,/usr/lib,/usr/include) and not spread in /usr.
> This could be usable in network environments where 
> /usr/bin,/usr/share,... are mounted as NFS export. (and it's closer to 
> the FHS....).
> 
> bye Thomas
> 
> PS: sorry for bad english
> PPS: i don't want another filesystem layout flame thread,it's just an 
> idea....
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 


-- 
Sergey Kuleshov <svyatogor@gentoo.org>
Let the Force be with us!

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] little filesystem layout idea

[Thomas Weidner]

I think using a symlink will end up in a more FHS like filesystem. where 
all, also QT,KDE,..., libraries/header/... are in proper locations under 
/usr/lib,/usr/include,... . having /usr/qt and others is for me the 
first step to make a "windows-like" filesystem. As network admin, you 
don't need an extra mount entry for /usr/qt/3/lib, but only for 
/usr/lib. (if bins,libs,shares are mounted seperately which might happen 
in networks with several archs...)

Svyatogor wrote:

>May I ask you then what is the point of having a /usr/qt/3/bin symlink at all? 
>The idea (as far as I understand) is that the programs are is spearate locations.
>Expesially the one like qt, which stay in the place they were compiled.
>
>On Thu, 05 Jun 2003 22:11:09 +0200
>Thomas Weidner <yasea@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>What about the following:
>>instead of heaving /usr/X/Y, /usr/X/Y is a symlink to /usr/Y/X.
>>so /usr/qt/3/bin whould be a symlink to /usr/bin/qt/3.
>>the advantage? all binaries/libraries/headers/... are under a common 
>>subdirectory (/usr/bin,/usr/lib,/usr/include) and not spread in /usr.
>>This could be usable in network environments where 
>>/usr/bin,/usr/share,... are mounted as NFS export. (and it's closer to 
>>the FHS....).
>>
>>bye Thomas
>>
>>PS: sorry for bad english
>>PPS: i don't want another filesystem layout flame thread,it's just an 
>>idea....
>>
>>
>>--
>>gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list