Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Aug 2008 23:33 UTC, submitted by Charles Wilson
Editorial GoboLinux is a distribution which sports a different file system structure than 'ordinary' Linux distributions. In order to remain compatible with the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard, symbolic links are used to map the GoboLinux tree to standard UNIX directories. A post in the GoboLinux forums suggested that it might be better to turn the concept around: retain the FHS, and then use symbolic links to map the GoboLinux tree on top of it. This sparked some interesting discussion. Read on for more details.
Thread beginning with comment 327299
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Inertia and stupidity
by hobgoblin on Tue 19th Aug 2008 08:18 UTC in reply to "RE: Inertia and stupidity"
hobgoblin
Member since:
2005-07-06

iirc, plan9 was until recently (or may still be) under a very strict license.

on that note, linux seems to be picking up more and more plan9 features as time goes on. most recent example is fuse iirc...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Inertia and stupidity
by yiyus on Tue 19th Aug 2008 10:23 in reply to "RE[2]: Inertia and stupidity"
yiyus Member since:
2006-02-27

Plan9 has been absolutely free for a long time.

It implements namespaces per proccess and bind commands that make actual file hierarchies look like something of the past. You can install different versions of the same program and more, for example: just run the yesterday command and you will be back to your system from the previous day.

And plan9 really follows its conventions.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

It implements namespaces per proccess and bind commands that make actual file hierarchies look like something of the past. You can install different versions of the same program and more, for example: just run the yesterday command and you will be back to your system from the previous day.


And the reason these abilities work so well is because it was factored into the design from the get-go. You can't keep on building on a system that was designed for mainframes and then hope it will still be up-to-date and capable 40 years later.

Reply Parent Score: 2