Call me crazy, but I've always thought that soft symlinks could be great here: - Put each package in it's own subdir under, say, /pkg. - Next, put symlinks into /usr/bin, /usr/lib, /etc, ad nauseum, in order to follow the Debian Policy.
This way, you could have /pkg/qt2, /pkg/qt3, /pkg/kde2, etc... Maybe it's the DOS mentality of 1 subdir per program, but I think this makes things very organized. What's this about only 8500 sub-dirs in /usr? On Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:22:09 -0600 Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 02:48:06AM +0200, Jarno Elonen wrote: > -snip- > > If there were a way to remove symlinks when the original file is removed, > > I think the following structure would be the easiest to understand and > > administrate: > > > > + usr > > + bin > > + qtcups -> ../qtcups/bin/qtcups > > + nano -> ../nano/bin/nano > > + sbin > > + traceroute -> ../traceroute/bin/traceroute > > + qtcups > > + etc (conf) > > + share (data) > > + bin (binaries) > > + doc (man, info) > > + nano > > + etc > > + bin > > + doc > > + traceroute > > + etc > > + bin > > + doc > > If it was structured like this then besides the other issues mentioned > wrt libs, you could have up to ~ 8500 subdirs in /usr, not particularly > good. 8) > > Chris Cheney -- +------------------------------------------------------------+ | Ron Johnson, Jr. Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Jefferson, LA USA http://ronandheather.dhs.org | | | ! "Millions of Chinese speak Chinese, and it's not | ! hereditary..." | ! Dr. Dean Edell ! +------------------------------------------------------------+
