What do you think about GOBO?

tony · 2005-01-17 14:46:48

Last week I've read an article and dicscussion about GoboLinux.
http://www.gobolinux.org/

"GoboLinux is an alternative Linux distribution which redefines the entire filesystem hierarchy.
In GoboLinux you don't need a package manager because the filesystem is the package manager: each program resides in its own directory, such as /Programs/Xorg/6.7.0/ and /Programs/KDE/3.2.2. Like it? ... "

I would like to hear what do you think about it (something like different point of view)?

skoal · 2005-01-17 19:09:31

Hell, I'm open to new things, especially new distributions. This one, however, smells a little funky to me, or maybe that's just the meat I left out on the counter. That whole filesystem thingy already turned me off to it. I started to browse around their site, but stopped right in my tracks when I saw their motivation (and the quote you gave above).

There are 2 types of people in this world: Those that follow FHS, and those requiring velcro straps in place of shoelaces.

kill · 2005-01-17 20:29:32

It seems extreamly cluttered to me. They have their special hierarchy but to keep everything working they have to make system links in the standard locations. so basically you have a standard setup that points to a bunch of odd places where everything really is.

cmp · 2005-01-18 17:07:11

It seems extreamly cluttered to me. They have their special hierarchy but to keep everything working they have to make system links in the standard locations. so basically you have a standard setup that points to a bunch of odd places where everything really is.

this is just used to help out packages, that were written in an odd manner, with hard coded paths for example. only the links in their /System/Links/ dir are really needed by the system itself (as far as i know, i only read the introductiory).
but i think the same is happening with some archpackages: all the big packages are moving to opt and their bin/lib/include dirs have to be put in the right files/env vars, this way you have a very much uneeded pollution. for example: i just updated my system and now firefox is in /opt too, so /opt/mozilla/bin si now in my $PATH var.
i actually think that their way of doing things isn't wrong at all, because this way you have a standard location to search for the files you need. only the configurarion of packages may be a bit harder, because the current way to just look in /etc is very comfortable.
to learn more about this promising distribution i would reccomend reading this article , as it points out many ideas behind gobo in detail.

i will try this distribution as soon as i have a cd burner at my hand.

sarah31 · 2005-01-18 18:15:50

Gobo has been around for well over a year . I read about it and figured that they were trying too hard to be "different". This distro will remain a very niche distro because of its vast difference filesystem-wise compared to anything else. This setup is far more typical of a windows like system than a *nix system. It would require alot of work on the part of the user and the devs. I would figure alot of packages would require special patches or build parametrers. For some things simply having certain configure options would just not do the trick.

Then there would be the final configuration of some software. It all sounds like a huge maintenance nightmare to me.

Ultimately Linux distributions all need to move in the way of some sort of standardization filesystem-wise or it will never take any major steps to competing with other more popular OSes. Arch defelopers know this and look for arch to move more and more towards FHS than a GOBO (I keep wanting to say Gabbo) type filesystem.

Iron Wallaby · 2005-01-18 20:30:35

I myself do not really like the UNIX way of filesystems. It's too complex and redundant. There are many much simpler and more intuitive ways of storing things, at least for desktop use -- of course, I am primarily a Mac user, so I am certain that has influenced my preferences.

I have to give GOBO some kudos, since they are daring to be different -- unfortunately, they're cutting against the grain (linking everything to the normal areas? Wasteful) -- UNIX is UNIX. I'm not sure how successful they will be, but at least they try to advance the world and be creative, and that's always a good thing.

thegnu · 2005-01-19 00:52:25

Iron Wallaby wrote:

I myself do not really like the UNIX way of filesystems...I am primarily a Mac user, so I am certain that has influenced my preferences.
I have to give GOBO some kudos, since they are daring to be different -- unfortunately, they're cutting against the grain (linking everything to the normal areas? Wasteful) -- UNIX is UNIX.

Ick. No offense, but Mac OS X is based on BSD. Have you ever opened the terminal in Mac OS X and run:

ls -R /

Give it a shot. The file structure is there, with the interface overlayed on it. UNIX IS UNIX, you got that right. The point you're missing is Mac OS X is UNIX. So quit doubting Gobolinux. Mac OS X has already forged the way.

Arch Linux

#1 2005-01-17 14:46:48

What do you think about GOBO?

#2 2005-01-17 19:09:31

Re: What do you think about GOBO?

#3 2005-01-17 20:29:32

Re: What do you think about GOBO?

#4 2005-01-18 17:07:11

Re: What do you think about GOBO?

#5 2005-01-18 18:15:50

Re: What do you think about GOBO?

#6 2005-01-18 20:30:35

Re: What do you think about GOBO?

#7 2005-01-19 00:52:25

Re: What do you think about GOBO?

Board footer