Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 23rd Aug 2008 15:37 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 327785
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Really, why does it matter? Why does it matter if firefox is in /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin? As long as both are in your $PATH you don't need to know anyway. The only times I can think of that I needed to know where an executable was, I was doing things no "average user" would do.
Most of what you say is great, but I take some issue with this. It doesn't matter to the user where their binaries are, for the most part, but it ought to matter to system designers, developers and packagers. Currently there's not enough agreement. My favorite example: games.
I think improving the logic and consistency of where things are placed and what those places are named would be good for Linux. It would improve matters for people who have to deal with it every day and it would ease more "average users" into "power users", make learning easier, which makes hacking easier, which will lead to more free software.
Why would there even be a relationship between name spaces and physical layouts?
Of course you should be able to distribute your data across different machines and different connection types. Especially these days when the web is more and more getting integrated into the "computer".
But why should the name space be dependent on this? Today we have the beginnings of ways to separate the two with tools like unionfs and such.




Member since:
2008-08-24
I have no problem with any distribution monkeying around with any aspect of Linux they want to, FHS included. FOSS is about evolution, and we have to create "mutants" if we want to find the "fittest". If every distro did things the same, the software would never evolve.
But I think the criticism of FHS is overblown. What bothers me most is how narrowly some folks look at Linux. There's this mentality of "all this junk is from the server days, now we all run Linux on our laptops so we can throw it all out". I happen to like the fact that I can put /usr on an NFS mount. Maybe that's useless to the average myspace user, but I don't see why it makes a difference to them whether all the executables are in one directory or seventeen.
Really, why does it matter? Why does it matter if firefox is in /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin? As long as both are in your $PATH you don't need to know anyway. The only times I can think of that I needed to know where an executable was, I was doing things no "average user" would do.
A few other notes:
- /srv is standard on Novell SLES, it's used for the webroot, ftp root, and similar. I wish more distros would use it (Hello Debian? Why is the webroot in /var???). Granted, in 99 out of 100 other cases, Debian sticks to the FHS better than SLES (ahem.. KDE binaries in /opt? What?)
- /etc is not English. It's Latin. Maybe we should create a FHS using all Latin terms. At least nobody would be getting favoritism.
- /usr/local is used by most Linux systems for packages that are compiled locally as opposed to being installed through the package manager. To me that is more useful than trying to create an artificial distinction between "OS" and "apps".
- I wonder how many of us linux admins are guilty of inventing our own TLD's and stinking up the situation even more. Yep, I look guilty...