On Wednesday 12 November 2008 06:28 am, Eugene Gorodinsky wrote: > I've been toying with the idea of a packaging system which would allow for > file hierarchy independence. ... While this hierarchy may be good for a > server environment, is far too complex for a desktop linux environment, as > it isn't very intuitive.
This comment may not be exactly on point, but your post gives me an opportunity to mention my desires for the FHS again, especially on a desktop system, with perhaps a few refinements since last time. I dislike having so many types of data dumped into ~, and would like to see separate hierarchies for stuff like the following: * user's configurations--I guess that would be $XDG_CONFIG_HOME and $XDG_CONFIG_DIRS * user's "real" data (that is files containing things like user's documents, photos, music, ..., but not things like user defined or selected icons, backgrounds, ...)--$XDG_DATA_HOME and $XDG_DATA_DIRS * user temp data--I guess maybe $XDG_CACHE_HOME * I think a fourth hierarchy is required for stuff that is not "real" user data--e.g., if for some reason an application has personalized icons, background images, or something similar, they do not go in $XDG_DATA_HOME but instead here Further, I don't want this to be just a hierarchy for X based (graphics) applications, but also for basic CLI based Linux applications. Applications (X-based and CLI based) should default to accessing and storing data in the appropriate of these hierarchies. Randy Kramer -- I didn't have time to write a short letter, so I created a video instead.--with apologies to Cicero, et.al. _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
