directory(tree) structure

user · 2006-04-13 03:40:57

I wish arch linux directory something like this

/bin
/lib
/share
not important point of my story wrote:
/boot
/proc
/tmp
/etc
/home

NO /usr or /usr/local

ANY customed /bin $PATH set to their /home/<usr_account>/<prefixed name>/bin

ALL default binaries in /bin, ALL shared or static libraries in /lib

Just wish.

PS: this post was written after "cd /opt && rm -rf *", Because i am using garnome

tyme · 2006-04-13 04:08:35

wish in one hand, sh*t in the other, don't ya know.

maybe in the future you should check what's in a directory before you do an rm -rf *. perhaps that would save you some headaches.

user · 2006-04-13 04:20:46

tyme wrote:

maybe in the future you should check what's in a directory before you do an rm -rf *. perhaps that would save you some headaches.

I rm -rf /opt, because it really unnecessary but only eat the hdd space.

Nothing more or less, it(/opt/*) goes against the grain with me.

tyme · 2006-04-13 04:48:42

well i'm sorry that /opt "goes against the grain" with you, but in arch a lot of large packages are given their own directory in /opt:

[mark@einsiedler opt]$ ls
gnome  kde       mesa-xgl-cvs  openoffice  xfce4
java   mesa-cvs  mozilla       planeshift
[mark@einsiedler opt]$

so, you can see, it's something you probably want to keep, and it isn't "unecessary" - it contains a lot of programs.

user · 2006-04-13 05:06:11

tyme wrote:

well i'm sorry that /opt "goes against the grain" with you, but in arch a lot of large packages are given their own directory in /opt:
[mark@einsiedler opt]$ ls
gnome  kde       mesa-xgl-cvs  openoffice  xfce4
java   mesa-cvs  mozilla       planeshift
[mark@einsiedler opt]$
so, you can see, it's something you probably want to keep, and it isn't "unecessary" - it contains a lot of programs.

gnome > garnome dir under my home dir
kde > my oldskool DE, i don't remember(IDNR).
mesa-xgl-cvs > just using my own compiled kernel and nvidia from {kernel,nvidia}
openoffice > using binary installer from(UBIF) with my custom alien.
xfce4 > IDNR
java > UBIF java.sun.com
mesa-cvs > see mesa-xgl-cvs
mozilla > UBIF mozilla.org
planeshift > i didn't test it(IDNTI).

tyme · 2006-04-13 05:11:29

nevermind

codemac · 2006-04-13 08:37:02

I think 'user' is missing the huge reasons as to why /usr and /opt are important.

http://www.pathname.com/fhs/

tyme · 2006-04-13 10:51:32

thank you. i was trying to find a description such as that but google yielded little useful results. perhaps i need to brush up on my google skills

user · 2006-04-13 12:00:25

codemac wrote:

I think 'user' is missing the huge reasons as to why /usr and /opt are important.
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/

only if I get something which is huge.

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=gobo

the distro is same feeling, different direction with me.

i miss the tree which is everything under one dir.

pressh · 2006-04-13 12:21:32

user wrote:

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=gobo

I think I miss the point why they want to put everything in a different location and then point symlinks to it
Besides, looking at their file hierachy I think they are too much inspired by the *great* operating system called windoze. I don't think it makes much sense the structure they have created.

user · 2006-04-13 12:38:34

pressh wrote:

I think they are too much inspired by the *great* operating system called windoze.

really great os(THE ORIGINALITY) is CP/M

poor Gary Kildall, poor Gary Kildall

quote from wikipedia : real point wrote:

Many of the basic concepts and internal mechanisms of early versions of MS-DOS were patterned after those of CP/M.

PS: i don't know what cp/m is, because IDNTI

user wrote:

the distro is same feeling, different direction with me.

after reread the distro site, i made mistake, they are the first distro who break the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard(FHS). so their direction can be very flexible.

Kudos to all.

user · 2006-04-13 13:33:34

[url=http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/189/]Linux -- The New CP/M?
by Kenneth Broll, in Editorials - Sat, Oct 28th 2000 23:59 PDT[/url]

phrakture · 2006-04-13 17:45:09

user: The filesystem hierarchy is, as codemac pointed out, specified in the FHS. It is not linux specific. It is a Unix standard, and covered under one of the POSIX or SUS standards.... can't recall the exacts.

Typically, when something is created as a standard by a group of people, you need to understand that all these wishes and discussions were probably covered. A good rule of thumb is that people in these standards groups are probably smarter than most of us here. They know what they're doing. Please, take the filesystem complain up with them.

user · 2006-04-13 18:14:09

wish > complain

hmm ;-)

then why we using linux, just stay with freebsd or 4.4bsd something
it's teh standard! don't even think about the standard.

and It will be ms world with the help of unix standard ppl...

i will agree with posix But fhs?? fish h^h^h smell

bah!

PS: i didn't insist to remove all unix style tree, just part of it. because too complex and bloated..

phrakture · 2006-04-13 20:23:59

user wrote:

then why we using linux, just stay with freebsd or 4.4bsd something
it's teh standard! don't even think about the standard.

Says who? Can you provide me a standard document that describes FreeBSD as being standard?

The point of the SUS standard is that there are allowed to be numerous OSes following a given interface. It is the same with POSIX. Not one of the common unix standards specify a given OS. Not one specifies who's "ls" utility you should use, only how it should work.

That is the same with, well, *every standard*. CSS standards do not describe how exactly pixels should be rendered on a screen, only that they should be this color or that color. The C++ standard does not say how one implements stack unwinding upon an exception, only that it should happen.

These are called "implementation details". They are, with every standard, unimportant - as long as a given implementation supports the standard's interface, it is acceptable.

user wrote:

and It will be ms world with the help of unix standard ppl...
i will agree with posix But fhs?? fish h^h^h smell

What does this mean? You do not agree with the FHS? You are aware that it has been thought out and modified for the past...hmmm... 13 years or so? Are you telling me your experience and knowledge superceeds a group of hundreds with more than 13 years of work into it?

user wrote:

PS: i didn't insist to remove all unix style tree, just part of it. because too complex and bloated..

Define "bloated"? Are you aware of the purpose of /usr ? Let's take a peek, it will be a journey for all of us.

Chapter 4. The /usr Hierarchy

Purpose

/usr is the second major section of the filesystem. /usr is shareable,
read-only data. That means that /usr should be shareable between various
FHS-compliant hosts and must not be written to. Any information that is
host-specific or varies with time is stored elsewhere.

Large software packages must not use a direct subdirectory under the /usr
hierarchy.

/usr is to contain non host-specific data/applications. This is very important. Let's go back to your "bloated" retort. Can you explain how it is "bloated" that, under the FHS, I am able to create an NFS share and mount it as /usr on a hundred different (quasi-compatible) machines? How is that "bloated"? Would not "bloated" be defined by being forced to install the exact same directory on every machine?

Snarkout · 2006-04-13 23:12:01

Ahhh - that was a ~*magical*~ journey. Thanks!

Now, to really stir the pot - what does usr mean? I'd always heard Unix System Resources, but I have seen many rebuttals to this as well.

BNC connector?

user · 2006-04-13 23:37:31

phrakture wrote:

Chapter 4. The /usr Hierarchy

Purpose

/usr is the second major section of the filesystem. /usr is shareable,
read-only data. That means that /usr should be shareable between various
FHS-compliant hosts and must not be written to. Any information that is
host-specific or varies with time is stored elsewhere.

Large software packages must not use a direct subdirectory under the /usr
hierarchy.
/usr is to contain non host-specific data/applications. This is very important. Let's go back to your "bloated" retort. Can you explain how it is "bloated" that, under the FHS, I am able to create an NFS share and mount it as /usr on a hundred different (quasi-compatible) machines? How is that "bloated"? Would not "bloated" be defined by being forced to install the exact same directory on every machine?

to me, /usr isn't so important, nfs mount root fs itself is possible, it shouldn't be /usr! it can be /home/<user_account>/<XXX> Does it look better?

non host-specific data/applications: What does this mean?
then we shouldn't install any host-specific applications into /usr??

PS: now i guess what "host-specific" means, it means glibc, init-script, kernel etc, just like below

"[url=http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/ wrote:

Linux From Scratch
Version 6.1.1
[/url]"]
#
*
5. Constructing a Temporary System
o Introduction
o Toolchain Technical Notes
o Binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2 - Pass 1
o GCC-3.4.3 - Pass 1
o Linux-Libc-Headers-2.6.11.2
o Glibc-2.3.4
o Adjusting the Toolchain
o Tcl-8.4.9
o Expect-5.43.0
o DejaGNU-1.4.4
o GCC-3.4.3 - Pass 2
o Binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2 - Pass 2
o Gawk-3.1.4
o Coreutils-5.2.1
o Bzip2-1.0.3
o Gzip-1.3.5
o Diffutils-2.8.1
o Findutils-4.2.23
o Make-3.80
o Grep-2.5.1a
o Sed-4.1.4
o Gettext-0.14.3
o Ncurses-5.4
o Patch-2.5.4
o Tar-1.15.1
o Texinfo-4.8
o Bash-3.0
o M4-1.4.3
o Bison-2.0
o Flex-2.5.31
o Util-linux-2.12q
o Perl-5.8.7
o Stripping
#
III. Building the LFS System
*
6. Installing Basic System Software
o Introduction
o Mounting Virtual Kernel File Systems
o Entering the Chroot Environment
o Changing Ownership
o Creating Directories
o Creating Essential Symlinks
o Creating the passwd, group, and log Files
o Populating /dev
o Linux-Libc-Headers-2.6.11.2
o Man-pages-2.01
o Glibc-2.3.4
o Re-adjusting the Toolchain
o Binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2
o GCC-3.4.3
o Coreutils-5.2.1
o Zlib-1.2.3
o Mktemp-1.5
o Iana-Etc-1.04
o Findutils-4.2.23
o Gawk-3.1.4
o Ncurses-5.4
o Readline-5.0
o Vim-6.3
o M4-1.4.3
o Bison-2.0
o Less-382
o Groff-1.19.1
o Sed-4.1.4
o Flex-2.5.31
o Gettext-0.14.3
o Inetutils-1.4.2
o IPRoute2-2.6.11-050330
o Perl-5.8.7
o Texinfo-4.8
o Autoconf-2.59
o Automake-1.9.5
o Bash-3.0
o File-4.13
o Libtool-1.5.14
o Bzip2-1.0.3
o Diffutils-2.8.1
o Kbd-1.12
o E2fsprogs-1.37
o Grep-2.5.1a
o GRUB-0.96
o Gzip-1.3.5
o Hotplug-2004_09_23
o Man-1.5p
o Make-3.80
o Module-Init-Tools-3.1
o Patch-2.5.4
o Procps-3.2.5
o Psmisc-21.6
o Shadow-4.0.9
o Sysklogd-1.4.1
o Sysvinit-2.86
o Tar-1.15.1
o Udev-056
o Util-linux-2.12q

user · 2006-04-14 00:54:55

So if they really want "non host-specific" space,
/home/<user_account>/<non host-specific> is much make sense to me.

Because it make sure to seperate non host-specific things from /.

:-)

PS: rm -rf /usr !!! Yay!

raskolnikov · 2006-04-14 00:59:26

Just make your own distro with your own layer and stop flamming then, maybe people will follow you... or not.

T-Dawg · 2006-04-14 01:04:33

don't you have something better to do then to argue about a standard directory structure? Get a life.

user · 2006-04-14 02:07:49

Penguin wrote:

don't you have something better to do then to argue about a standard directory structure? Get a life.

No, there is nothing better to do then talk about this, though i processing something other things to do.

Well said!

Next time, i will not install gnome stock from arch, because it is not STANDARD.

It cause a lot problem to compile anjuta(cvs-daily) my own.

/etc/profile.d/gnome.sh wrote:

export GNOMEDIR=/opt/gnome
export GNOME2_PATH=/opt/gnome
export PATH=$PATH:$GNOMEDIR/bin
export MANPATH=$MANPATH:$GNOMEDIR/man
export PKG_CONFIG_PATH=$PKG_CONFIG_PATH:$GNOMEDIR/lib/pkgconfig
export LIBGLADE_MODULE_PATH=$LIBGLADE_MODULE_PATH:$GNOMEDIR/lib/libglade/2.0
export ACLOCAL_FLAGS="$ACLOCAL_FLAGS -I $GNOME2_PATH/share/aclocal"
if [ ! -z $XDG_DATA_DIRS ]; then
export XDG_DATA_DIRS=$XDG_DATA_DIRS:$GNOMEDIR/share
else
export XDG_DATA_DIRS=$GNOMEDIR/share
fi
if [ ! -z $XDG_CONFIG_DIRS ]; then
export XDG_CONFIG_DIRS=$XDG_CONFIG_DIRS:$GNOMEDIR/etc/xdg
else
export XDG_CONFIG_DIRS=$GNOMEDIR/etc/xdg
fi

PS: Mind you, experience.

sudo rm -rf /initrd /media
sudo rm /etc/profile.d/{gnome.sh,mozilla-common.sh,kde.csh,kde.sh,qt.sh}

user · 2006-04-14 02:26:47

raskolnikov wrote:

Just make your own distro with your own layer and stop flamming then, maybe people will follow you... or not.

Already did, here is another environment(ppl, time, space), in hurry no time lead me select arch.

I like arch, it save time.

elasticdog · 2006-04-14 02:54:09

Me Tarzan...you Jane

Arch Linux

#1 2006-04-13 03:40:57

directory(tree) structure

#2 2006-04-13 04:08:35

Re: directory(tree) structure

#3 2006-04-13 04:20:46

Re: directory(tree) structure

#4 2006-04-13 04:48:42

Re: directory(tree) structure

#5 2006-04-13 05:06:11

Re: directory(tree) structure

#6 2006-04-13 05:11:29

Re: directory(tree) structure

#7 2006-04-13 08:37:02

Re: directory(tree) structure

#8 2006-04-13 10:51:32

Re: directory(tree) structure

#9 2006-04-13 12:00:25

Re: directory(tree) structure

#10 2006-04-13 12:21:32

Re: directory(tree) structure

#11 2006-04-13 12:38:34

Re: directory(tree) structure

#12 2006-04-13 13:33:34

Re: directory(tree) structure

#13 2006-04-13 17:45:09

Re: directory(tree) structure

#14 2006-04-13 18:14:09

Re: directory(tree) structure

#15 2006-04-13 20:23:59

Re: directory(tree) structure

#16 2006-04-13 23:12:01

Re: directory(tree) structure

#17 2006-04-13 23:37:31

Re: directory(tree) structure

#18 2006-04-14 00:54:55

Re: directory(tree) structure

#19 2006-04-14 00:59:26

Re: directory(tree) structure

#20 2006-04-14 01:04:33

Re: directory(tree) structure

#21 2006-04-14 02:07:49

Re: directory(tree) structure

#22 2006-04-14 02:26:47

Re: directory(tree) structure

#23 2006-04-14 02:54:09

Re: directory(tree) structure

Board footer