Emanuel Dejanu wrote: > > For evolution we some times must break traditions. > I agree that this is not a must but will be nice if > LinuxBase will consider such a recomandation. I know > that this will not happen over the night but can be.
The LSB is a place to codify existing practice, in the most part. If you want to encourage a switch to .settings, you'll have to lobby elsewhere. (Maybe start with the kde and gnome people, as they're interested in how large suites of programs store config info.) - Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 26 martie 2002 11:41 > To: Emanuel Dejanu > Subject: Re: User settings > > This is the Unix tradition, you have to live with that > > On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Emanuel Dejanu wrote: > > > Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 11:30:53 +0200 > > From: Emanuel Dejanu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: User settings > > Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 10:35:57 +0100 > > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I have problems with how Linux keep program settings. > > If you use many programs then your home is full with > > lots of files and directories that you do not use, > > directly and then your home is a mess. What you think > > that instead of using $HOME/ to keep program settings > > to use $HOME/.settings/ directory ? > > > > Best regards, > > > > Emanuel Dejanu > > > > P.S. I know that hey are hidden but I like to see all > > hidden files, but not the settings (configuration) files > > from my home. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
