Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 23rd Aug 2008 15:37 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 327878
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: How about just a simple read?
by devurandom on Mon 25th Aug 2008 13:19
in reply to "How about just a simple read?"
RE[2]: How about just a simple read?
by dagw on Mon 25th Aug 2008 13:41
in reply to "RE: How about just a simple read?"
In addition it seems that half the problems stem from the fact that FHS isn't strict or detailed enough, leaving too much leeway for distros to decide where stuff should go. If anything the FHS should contain more "complexity" to the extent it should contain even more restrictions and details about how things should and should not be done.






Member since:
2006-01-10
All this debate about the FHS being too complicated for newer users is just sad. I started off my computing days using the Atari 8-bit computers. There really were no specific file structures for them at all. Then came the Atari ST, and with the exception of the Auto folder and a desktop.ini or newdesk.ini file depending on what version of the OS, there weren't any 'system' files so everything was just either the program, or it's libraries and they went in the programs folder.
Then I used Amiga OS and Windows 95. Frankly when I switched to Linux it was a five minute read and I completely understood why the directory structure was the way it was, and it made complete sense.
So those who are confused by it.... read wikipedia or something, it explains it nicely.