In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Theodore Tso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 11:11:56AM -0700, sandy pond wrote: >> >> I really don't expect the present scheme to last forever. >> Someday the users home directory will be split from the >> location where user-specific configuration information is >> stored. The sooner this is done the easier it will be. >> Ultimately, this may be the best justification for doing >> this now when there is a good opportunity. >> > >Personally, I really doubt that. Existing practice is that "dot >files" don't show up in directory listings, either via /bin/ls or via >graphical file managers. So they don't really "clutter" the home >directory. And by being in the user's home directory, they're easy >for programs to find, and easy for system administrators to back up. >On top of that, there is the entrenched history to consider. So I >believe the likelihood of this changing in the near future is small.
.files don't clutter the home directory? That's your practice and default. When I type "ls", it's almost always the "ls -al" variant, and .files make horrendous clutter. Unfortunately, also, I am forced to use doze at work, so I set Explorer to ignore the "hidden file" flag - it causes me horrendous grief otherwise... (which may explain why I always use the "a" flag for ls...) > >The question you raise is much like one of whether individual files >should be in /etc, or in directories. i.e., /etc/exim.conf, >vs. /etc/exim/exim.conf. To say that packages's should *always* be in >a directory, even when they have a single rc file, is not necessarily >going to be viewed as reasonable. Many people will seriously dislike >sucuh an arrangement. They will point out, correctly, that the >difference between having a single file ~/.foorc and having a deep >structure such as ~/.foo/foorc doesn't reduce the directory listing of >"ls -a" much, and needless makes the directory hierarchy more complex. > >So the issue is much more complicated than you make it out to be.... > Why not simply say that personal configuration should be ~/etc/, whose structure mirrors that of /etc/? That way - firstly the files *aren't* hidden - hidden files are a damn pain! Secondly it addresses your comment about ~/.foo/foorc (though you've missed the point here - ~/.foo/whatever is no improvement on ~/.foorc which the OP wanted to move away from :-) I've got no problems with ~/etc/foorc or ~/etc/foo/rc - whatever the packager wants. And thirdly, and from my point of view extremely useful, I don't have to learn two different layouts for config files, ie the variants in /etc and ~ Cheers, Wol -- Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk HEX wondered how much he should tell the Wizards. He felt it would not be a good idea to burden them with too much input. Hex always thought of his reports as Lies-to-People. The Science of Discworld : (c) Terry Pratchett 1999
