"BCS" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > Hello Nick, > >> "BCS" <[email protected]> wrote in message >> news:[email protected]... >> >>> The same holds for every file in /usr/bin, I wonder what that says >>> about all the other people who put stuff there. Similar thought hold >>> for the other bits and places. >>> >> Maybe it's my windows upbringing, but I've never liked the idea of >> having each of my apps spread all across the whole filesystem. >> > > There is something to be said for that, but at least with Linux it's > *only* the filesystem that it gets spread across (registry). > > I think this is a case where the phrase "when in Rome" is a good starting > point. >
True enough. Actually, this is something I've often given thought to. The basic problem, really, is inherent limitations of hierarchies. There are apps, and then apps can have executables, helper executables, asset files, help files, settings files, plugins, etc. This is really a 2D matrix with "App" on one axis and "Type of data" on the other. So to put it into a hierarchical data system (ie, any modern filesystem) one must arbitrarily choose one of the axes to be the most significant. Unix traditionally chooses "type of data". Windows and the modern OSX package system choose "app" (with notable exceptions - registry, user settings directories). My own personal preference is "app", but there are certainly reasonable points to be made for either approach. This also gets into why I was a bit disappointed that MS's WinFS project died out. I hadn't thought much about it prior to all the talk of WinFS, but things like that and iTunes convinced me rather quickly that hierarchical filesystems are a bit antiquated for modern needs, and that there are definite benefits to be gained from a relational approach even if it's nothing more than a system-wide layer on top of a traditional hierarchical system (hell, DBMS's abandoned hierarchies in favor of relational long ago, and for good reason). But of course, actually pulling that off on a technical level, and doing it well, is probably another matter entirely, at least if MS's experience is any indication.
