Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 23rd Aug 2008 15:37 UTC
Editorial Earlier this week, we ran a story on GoboLinux, and the distribution's effort to replace the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard with a more pleasant, human-readable, and logical design. A lot of people liked the idea of modernising/replacing the FHS, but just as many people were against doing so. Valid arguments were presented both ways, but in this article, I would like to focus on a common sentiment that came forward in that discussion: normal users shouldn't see the FHS, and advanced users are smart enough to figure out how the FHS works.
Thread beginning with comment 327798
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: what is wrong with FHS?
by Nalle on Sun 24th Aug 2008 07:54 UTC in reply to "RE: what is wrong with FHS?"
Nalle
Member since:
2005-07-06

I mean, with the advent of tab completion, is it really worth dropping the e in user?


Either I've misunderstood or you have!
user without e would be usr and that is not short for user, but for unix shared recources.

But then again I might have misunderstood your post, making the quote in the top here being out out of context?

Nalle Berg
/.nalle.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: what is wrong with FHS?
by Adam S on Sun 24th Aug 2008 16:23 in reply to "RE[2]: what is wrong with FHS?"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

user without e would be usr and that is not short for user, but for unix shared recources.


Not so much. /usr is likely just shorthand for "user", as documented a zillion times everywhere. Unix System Resources was introduced after the hierarchy was already in effect.

http://www.definethat.com/define/7110.htm

http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-chat/2003-December/00171...

Reply Parent Score: 1

MamiyaOtaru Member since:
2005-11-11

I suppose you believe f(s)ck stands for Fornication Under Consent of the King too ;)

Bacronyms ftl

Reply Parent Score: 3