On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 01:06:43PM -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote: > >If we can provide enough of an environment in /usr/bin that having it in > >your PATH (and you generally would, no matter what you did with your dot > >files) gets you a fairly complete environment, then that reduces the > >need for complex PATH management. > >
[Is there any point to continuing this sub-thread given that the issue has already been decided? As James said, you could file an appeal.] > That's fine as long as the environment you provide is the one the users > want. By front loading the environment with basicallyy everything, > you're denying the user or the admin the ability to override your > default environment. A default environment that makes 90% of users/developers happy and provides the remaining 10% with ways to override the environment so it is more similar to XPG4, XPG6, BSD, Linux, whatever, is worth having. > It stops being a 'default' environment, and becomes the only environment. No. It asymptotically approaches "only environment" status as people stop creating conflicts and the volume of non-conflicts dwarfs conflicts. Nico --
