Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 26th Jun 2013 14:12 UTC
Linux "This document outlines the set of requirements and guidelines for file and directory placement under the Linux operating system according to those of the FSSTND v2.3 final (January 29, 2004) and also its actual implementation on an arbitrary system. It is meant to be accessible to all members of the Linux community, be distribution independent and is intended to discuss the impact of the FSSTND and how it has managed to increase the efficiency of support interoperability of applications, system administration tools, development tools, and scripts as well as greater uniformity of documentation for these systems."
Thread beginning with comment 565721
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Wafflez
by UltraZelda64 on Wed 26th Jun 2013 22:03 UTC in reply to "Comment by Wafflez"
UltraZelda64
Member since:
2006-12-05

/bin, /etc, /usr - it's all dinosaurs.
Atleast dinosaurs went extinct...

So, what are you trying to say? That "C:\WINDOWS" and "C:\Program Files" are better? That you'd rather deal with something like "C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts" instead of "/etc/hosts"?

I'd say that the UNIX file system structure is far from "extinct." It could use a few improvements (some of which are already being done), but as it is it's very comfortable to navigate--either by command line or by graphical file manager. By comparison, I can navigate a Windows file system fine with Windows Explorer (well, in most cases--the hosts file example above is one that I never remembered...), but there is no point in even trying to navigate the Windows file system structure by commands. Too many special characters needed to bypass spaces in file/directory names, and the file/directory names tend to just be too damn long.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: Comment by Wafflez
by leech on Wed 26th Jun 2013 23:26 in reply to "RE: Comment by Wafflez"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

Even the Amiga is miles ahead of the old Dos structure (which Windows continues on to this day.)

At least it has the ability to Assign drives or directories to where ever you want them.

For example, you can do DH0 (or HD0 depending on whatever you want) as the first partition, and then name it System, or whatever, but then use an assign to make it so you can use System: to mean that partition's root. Or let's say you have the SSL software (AmiSSL) installed in the Utilities folder under the System partition. You could put in the startup-sequence file "Assign >NIL AmiSSL: SYS:Utilities/AmiSSL"

Is it simple? Not especially. It is useful? Very. Is it unix like? Certainly. You basically do the same thing with mount points in Linux.

Anytime I see articles or distributions talking about changing paths around it makes me want to start beating people. In fact I'm debating on whether or not I should dump Arch Linux, who is going that route and start using something else. Anyone know of another Rolling Release as awesome as Arch, but doesn't jump on every single bandwagon that Fedora wants to push? (Fedora was the first one I saw that said they were merging all of the 'bin/sbin' folders into one...)

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[3]: Comment by Wafflez
by znby on Wed 26th Jun 2013 23:52 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Wafflez"
znby Member since:
2012-02-03

Probably inspired by the logical names in VMS. Cool feature nonetheless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Files-11#Logical_names

Edited 2013-06-26 23:53 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Wafflez
by Doc Pain on Thu 27th Jun 2013 05:04 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Wafflez"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

Even the Amiga is miles ahead of the old Dos structure (which Windows continues on to this day.)

At least it has the ability to Assign drives or directories to where ever you want them.


You could do something comparable with DOS, using the SUBST and JOIN commands. Both can be used to compose a "lazy man's mount command". :-)

(Fedora was the first one I saw that said they were merging all of the 'bin/sbin' folders into one...)


Allow me to mention a small detail.

Today, "folder" is being used synonymously for a directory. This is technically wrong. A directory is represented by a folder (a pictural element) in many (or most) GUIs, but it's not the same. The relations we are talking about are "is a" vs. "is represented by a" or "looks like a". Therefor directory is the correct term, and "folder" is the name of the kind of icon used for a directory. (By the way, it's not the only existing visual representation. Others are a filing cabinet or a drawer.) No, honestly: Terminology sometimes matters. Just because many people insist on calling directories "folders", they do not become folders.

I know people will start bashing me for being more than pedantic about this issue. It will probably convince me to call any computer "Bob". :-)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by Wafflez
by Wafflez on Thu 27th Jun 2013 06:32 in reply to "RE: Comment by Wafflez"
Wafflez Member since:
2011-06-26

Total Commander.

Don't blame Windows if you're using Explorer for navigation.

As for file system layout - GoboLinux did it right.

Edited 2013-06-27 06:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Wafflez
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 27th Jun 2013 07:47 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Wafflez"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Don't blame Windows if you're using Explorer for navigation.

Wait--let me get this straight. Don't blame Windows for coming with a crap file manager? Something as basic and critical as a file manager?

But actually, that's not the problem. I can use Explorer; I never really had any problem with it that I recall. I have tried others very briefly (pretty sure Total Commander was one of them), but either didn't like them or the idea that you have to pay for such basic functionality that comes with the system in the first place (also not a fan of nagware)... and again, Explorer worked just fine for me.

The real problem that I'm referring to is the file system itself, not the interface/file manager (Explorer). It sucks no matter what file manager you throw it it. And I have to say that I wasn't exactly amazed with the GoboLinux file system either... seemed heavily Apple-inspired to me. Their idea was never adopted by anything else and where is GoboLinux today? Seems it's long been dead. No new release in years. It was interesting, though.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Wafflez
by Laurence on Thu 27th Jun 2013 09:10 in reply to "RE: Comment by Wafflez"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

To be fair, if you are navigating those paths by CLI, then you'd be better off using the env vars (eg %programfiles%, %windir%, etc). Plus they take into account non-standard directory paths (which are rare, but can happen).

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Wafflez
by ricegf on Fri 28th Jun 2013 11:21 in reply to "RE: Comment by Wafflez"
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

Worse than that, on a really big project, we run out of characters in our system model hierarchies (around 260 max characters - I don't remember exact number off-hand except that it's small) unless you keep your folder names really short.

And we constantly must ask each other the eternal question, "So what did you map to M: to run that script again?"

Windows' drive letters are the abomination IMHO - a relic of the distant past where each floppy drive had to be manually tended with care. It's always a bit of a relief to me to return to a sane Linux / Unix unified file system.

Reply Parent Score: 2