Nick Rout wrote:
On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 15:47:59 +1300
david merriman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, maybe it *is* broke,
In what way?
I don't know. I wasn't saying that it actually is broken, just
speculating "what if it is ?".
but everyone's used to the workarounds and
inconsistencies, and no-one else wants to rock the boat by suggesting a
more sensible way to do it...
In what way is it more sensible? Looks to me like the hierarchy under C:
\Program\ Files (or whatever it's called).
Again, I wasn't saying that it *is* more sensible, just observing that
people get used to "the way things are done", and tend to forget the
historical reasons *why* they were done that way in the first place.
Eventually, inertia takes over, and "the way things are done" becomes
"that's just the way it is, sit down and shut up" :-) . At some point,
the original reasons may no longer be relevant, and may in fact become a
hindrance, as (I think) the article inferred.
AFAICT, The GoboLinux developers are suggesting an alternative way of
doing things which seems - from my relatively new linux user's viewpoint
- to be a reasonable and sensible way. The reasons for change given in
the article made sense to me. But then I don't have all the historical
background to refute it.
And what's wrong with the C:\Program Files\<Program Name>\ hierarchy
anyway ? :-P <g,d&r>
David
--
Captain Burton stood at the bow of his massive sailing ship, his
weathered face resembling improperly cured leather that wouldn't even be
used to make a coat or something.
