Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #232642 > unrolled thread

Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 04:10 +0100
    Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2021-03-10 05:00 +0100
      Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 13:30 +0100
        Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted  to Debian. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-03-10 13:50 +0100
          Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2021-03-10 14:00 +0100
            Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 19:10 +0100
              Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-03-10 19:20 +0100
                Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 20:30 +0100
                  Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 22:10 +0100
                    Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted  to Debian. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-03-11 01:10 +0100
                      Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 01:40 +0100
                        Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted  to Debian. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-03-11 01:50 +0100
                          Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 03:30 +0100
                            Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted  to Debian. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-03-11 11:50 +0100
                              Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 12:50 +0100
                      Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-11 10:30 +0100
                        Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-03-11 11:50 +0100
                        Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2021-03-11 13:50 +0100
                          Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-11 14:50 +0100
                        Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian. Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-11 18:10 +0100
              Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2021-03-10 19:30 +0100
                Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 20:40 +0100
                  Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian. Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-10 23:30 +0100
                    Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 00:30 +0100
                      Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-03-11 12:00 +0100
                  Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-11 20:00 +0100
                    Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 21:10 +0100
                      Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-12 05:10 +0100
                        Windows drive letters (was Re: Is there an alternative filesystem  hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.) The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-03-12 10:40 +0100
                          Re: Windows drive letters (was Re: Is there an alternative  filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.) David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-12 23:30 +0100
                        Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-12 17:10 +0100
                          Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-12 23:20 +0100
                      Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-12 15:30 +0100
              Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-11 10:20 +0100
            Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian. Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-10 23:20 +0100
              Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Jeremy Ardley <jeremy@ardley.org> - 2021-03-10 23:30 +0100
                Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian. Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-11 00:30 +0100
              Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de> - 2021-03-10 23:40 +0100
                Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 00:50 +0100
              Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. IL Ka <kazakevichilya@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 01:00 +0100
                Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2021-03-11 01:30 +0100
                  Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 01:40 +0100
                  Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. IL Ka <kazakevichilya@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 02:20 +0100
                    Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 03:10 +0100
          Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-10 14:00 +0100
            Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 14:10 +0100
              Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted  to Debian. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-03-10 14:30 +0100
                Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 19:10 +0100
          Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 14:10 +0100
            Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. IL Ka <kazakevichilya@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 14:30 +0100
          Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian. "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2021-03-10 14:20 +0100
      Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. "J.B. Nicholson" <jbn@forestfield.org> - 2021-03-11 01:50 +0100
    Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2021-03-10 10:10 +0100
    Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2021-03-10 14:20 +0100
      Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 14:30 +0100
        Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2021-03-10 15:40 +0100
        Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2021-03-10 16:30 +0100
          Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-10 18:00 +0100
          Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 21:30 +0100
            Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-03-10 21:40 +0100
            Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-03-10 22:00 +0100
              Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-03-10 22:10 +0100
                Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 22:30 +0100
            Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian. Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-10 23:50 +0100
              Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 00:40 +0100
                Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-11 09:30 +0100
              Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-11 05:00 +0100
                Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 06:20 +0100
                  Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-11 19:40 +0100
                    Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2021-03-11 19:50 +0100
      Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-10 14:30 +0100
        Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 19:10 +0100
    Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org> - 2021-03-10 19:20 +0100
    Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian. Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-10 23:30 +0100
      Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be  adapted to Debian. Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 00:30 +0100
        Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian. deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-03-11 07:30 +0100

Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

#232735 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 16:19:42 -0400
Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> wrote:

> >   if you want to see an example of what it takes to
> > make changes to this sort of layout google "Debian
> > merged /usr" and read those threads.  :)  
> 
> I just read this:
> https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/TheCaseForTheUsrMerge/
> It seems as a good idea that merge of /usr.
> I was wondering what would happen if some program used filesystem
> paths as its input data for some processing task.  He he, yes,
> changing status quo is not easy
> 

Something happened. Prior to this it wasn't unusual to put /usr on a
separate partition, sometimes making it read-only for a bit of extra
security.

Today, software on /usr is required during boot, and I think that came
as a bit of a surprise to the separate-/usr people. It is still
possible to keep /usr separate if really desired, but the initramfs
needs to know how to mount it at boot time.

There was a time when 'software' and 'applications' were two different
and distinct things, when applications were user programs and software
was the set of programs that made the computer work, today called system
software. A computer as delivered contained both hardware and software,
and it was up to the owner to write the applications. OK, that's going
back a bit...

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232738 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

Joe wrote: 
> There was a time when 'software' and 'applications' were two different
> and distinct things, when applications were user programs and software
> was the set of programs that made the computer work, today called system
> software. A computer as delivered contained both hardware and software,
> and it was up to the owner to write the applications. OK, that's going
> back a bit...


Once upon a time there were programmers. Frequently they had to
build the hardware that they programmed -- indeed, it was a bit
of a luxury to only be a programmer, and not also have
responsibility for hardware maintenance (or design).

Then there were systems programmers and application programmers.
Systems programmers wrote operating systems and utilities for
them. Applications programmers wrote applications. There was a lot of crossover.

Then there were operators, systems programmers and application
programmers. Operator was a junior position that did physical
things (mount tapes, plug in cables) and ran commands to do
things on the systems. They usually moved up to being --

Systems administrators, who did some programming in service to
the systems, but not too much. The more senior a sysadmin was,
the more time they spent programming and the less time they
spent doing physical things, unless they wanted to do that.

Sysadmins started to specialize. People who configured switches
and routers and talked to telephone companies became
"network engineers". People who spent time working on
firewalls and security policies and thinking about that became
"security engineers". Junior people who read scripts to
end users became the helpdesk. And so forth.

Then we noticed that a bunch of people were doing things
manually when they should be automated. This was especially bad
in places where there were no senior sysadmins or systems
programmers. But we did have the internet, and senior sysadmins
got together and started writing tools to make their lives
easier: infrastructure automation. Current tools for that
include chef, puppet, ansible, salt...

(all of this is largely quoting myself circa April 2016)

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232741 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

> Joe wrote:
> > There was a time when 'software' and 'applications' were two different
> > and distinct things, when applications were user programs and software
> > was the set of programs that made the computer work, today called system
> > software. A computer as delivered contained both hardware and software,
> > and it was up to the owner to write the applications. OK, that's going
> > back a bit...
>
>
> Once upon a time there were programmers. Frequently they had to
> build the hardware that they programmed -- indeed, it was a bit
> of a luxury to only be a programmer, and not also have
> responsibility for hardware maintenance (or design).
>
> Then there were systems programmers and application programmers.
> Systems programmers wrote operating systems and utilities for
> them. Applications programmers wrote applications. There was a lot of
crossover.
>
> Then there were operators, systems programmers and application
> programmers. Operator was a junior position that did physical
> things (mount tapes, plug in cables) and ran commands to do
> things on the systems. They usually moved up to being --
>
> Systems administrators, who did some programming in service to
> the systems, but not too much. The more senior a sysadmin was,
> the more time they spent programming and the less time they
> spent doing physical things, unless they wanted to do that.
>
> Sysadmins started to specialize. People who configured switches
> and routers and talked to telephone companies became
> "network engineers". People who spent time working on
> firewalls and security policies and thinking about that became
> "security engineers". Junior people who read scripts to
> end users became the helpdesk. And so forth.
>
> Then we noticed that a bunch of people were doing things
> manually when they should be automated. This was especially bad
> in places where there were no senior sysadmins or systems
> programmers. But we did have the internet, and senior sysadmins
> got together and started writing tools to make their lives
> easier: infrastructure automation. Current tools for that
> include chef, puppet, ansible, salt...
>
> (all of this is largely quoting myself circa April 2016)
>
> -dsr-

Wow, it is very impressive how things evolve.

Since this thread is about this filesystem hierarchy debate,
I would like to add this post I just read:
http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html
Looks like Wikipedia is right: many years ago, /usr meant "user", and there
was no /home

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232750

> I just read this:
> https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/TheCaseForTheUsrMerge/
> It seems as a good idea that merge of /usr.
> I was wondering what would happen if some program used filesystem paths
> as its input data for some processing task.  He he, yes, changing status quo
> is not easy

Here's one source of breakage I encountered a few times because of this
/usr merge (which I generally welcome, BTW):

    dpkg -S =foo

this (using the Zsh shell) should give me the name of the Debian package
which provides the command `foo`.  It works well for most commands, but
it fails for `ifconfig` because `ifconfig` was actually installed in
/sbin/ifconfig (but the /usr merge makes this same /sbin directory
available under the name /usr/sbin so Zsh thinks that `ifconfig` comes
from `/usr/sbin/ifconfig` whereas `dpkg` doesn't have any record of
installing a `/usr/sbin/ifconfig` file).


        Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232759 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

> Here's one source of breakage I encountered a few times because of this
> /usr merge (which I generally welcome, BTW):
>
>     dpkg -S =foo
>
> this (using the Zsh shell) should give me the name of the Debian package
> which provides the command `foo`.  It works well for most commands, but
> it fails for `ifconfig` because `ifconfig` was actually installed in
> /sbin/ifconfig (but the /usr merge makes this same /sbin directory
> available under the name /usr/sbin so Zsh thinks that `ifconfig` comes
> from `/usr/sbin/ifconfig` whereas `dpkg` doesn't have any record of
> installing a `/usr/sbin/ifconfig` file).

Yes, before every possible bug derived from that change is corrected,
you could use some sort path translation program
that takes paths from the caller program and translates it
to some path the called program can understand.
Just thinking.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232795 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 07:35:58PM -0400, Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z wrote:
> > Here's one source of breakage I encountered a few times because of this

[good example of collateral damage from usrmerge]

> Yes, before every possible bug derived from that change is corrected,
> you could use some sort path translation program
> that takes paths from the caller program and translates it
> to some path the called program can understand.

Fighting complexity with complexity. Thar sounds like a recipe
for an exponential runaway. What could possibly go wrong ;-)

> Just thinking.

Just musing :)

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232785 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

On Wed 10 Mar 2021 at 17:45:48 (-0500), Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > I just read this:
> > https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/TheCaseForTheUsrMerge/
> > It seems as a good idea that merge of /usr.
> > I was wondering what would happen if some program used filesystem paths
> > as its input data for some processing task.  He he, yes, changing status quo
> > is not easy
> 
> Here's one source of breakage I encountered a few times because of this
> /usr merge (which I generally welcome, BTW):
> 
>     dpkg -S =foo
> 
> this (using the Zsh shell) should give me the name of the Debian package
> which provides the command `foo`.  It works well for most commands, but
> it fails for `ifconfig` because `ifconfig` was actually installed in
> /sbin/ifconfig (but the /usr merge makes this same /sbin directory
> available under the name /usr/sbin so Zsh thinks that `ifconfig` comes
> from `/usr/sbin/ifconfig` whereas `dpkg` doesn't have any record of
> installing a `/usr/sbin/ifconfig` file).

Sorry, but we're not all familiar with the construct "=foo"
as interpreted by zsh, oops, Zsh. Can you elaborate on what
dpkg itself is being fed by this command line. I searched
man dpkg   and   man dpkg-query   for = but that didn't help.

bash:

$ dpkg -S ifconfig
net-tools: /sbin/ifconfig
net-tools: /usr/share/man/de/man8/ifconfig.8.gz
net-tools: /usr/share/man/man8/ifconfig.8.gz
net-tools: /usr/share/man/pt_BR/man8/ifconfig.8.gz
net-tools: /usr/share/man/fr/man8/ifconfig.8.gz
$ dpkg -S =ifconfig
dpkg-query: no path found matching pattern *=ifconfig*
1 $ 

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232786 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 14:52, David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed 10 Mar 2021 at 17:45:48 (-0500), Stefan Monnier wrote:

> >     dpkg -S =foo

> Sorry, but we're not all familiar with the construct "=foo"
> as interpreted by zsh, oops, Zsh. Can you elaborate on what
> dpkg itself is being fed by this command line. I searched
> man dpkg   and   man dpkg-query   for = but that didn't help.

It appears to be a Zsh feature, nothing to do with dpkg.
During procrastination, I found this [1]:
'''
The companion of `~' is `=', which again has to occur at the start
of a word or assignment to be special. The remainder of the word
(here the entire remainder, because directory paths aren't useful)
is taken as the name of an external command, and the word is
expanded to the complete path to that command, using $PATH
just as if the command were to be executed:

  % print =ls
  /bin/ls
'''
[1] http://zsh.sourceforge.net/Guide/zshguide03.html#l58

So the above dpkg command seems to be the equivalent of
  dpkg -S $(type -p foo)
in Bash.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232825 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

On Thu 11 Mar 2021 at 16:09:40 (+1100), David wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 14:52, David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Wed 10 Mar 2021 at 17:45:48 (-0500), Stefan Monnier wrote:
> 
> > >     dpkg -S =foo
> 
> > Sorry, but we're not all familiar with the construct "=foo"
> > as interpreted by zsh, oops, Zsh. Can you elaborate on what
> > dpkg itself is being fed by this command line. I searched
> > man dpkg   and   man dpkg-query   for = but that didn't help.
> 
> It appears to be a Zsh feature, nothing to do with dpkg.
> During procrastination, I found this [1]:
> '''
> The companion of `~' is `=', which again has to occur at the start
> of a word or assignment to be special. The remainder of the word
> (here the entire remainder, because directory paths aren't useful)
> is taken as the name of an external command, and the word is
> expanded to the complete path to that command, using $PATH
> just as if the command were to be executed:
> 
>   % print =ls
>   /bin/ls
> '''
> [1] http://zsh.sourceforge.net/Guide/zshguide03.html#l58
> 
> So the above dpkg command seems to be the equivalent of
>   dpkg -S $(type -p foo)
> in Bash.

Thanks. So really the complaint is just that dpkg -S operates on the
paths of files as packaged, whereas type -p yields canonical paths,
I assume. Interactively, I guess that's another reason I hadn't thought of
for piping   dpkg -S unadornedname | less   or using   apt-file find
likewise piped. As for scripts (other than personal ones), would people
write them to rely on this feature?

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232826 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:35:44PM -0600, David Wright wrote:
> Thanks. So really the complaint is just that dpkg -S operates on the
> paths of files as packaged, whereas type -p yields canonical paths,
> I assume.

It'll search through the directories in PATH, in order, and use the
first one that contains the program.  That may or may not be the
"canonical" one, depending on how PATH is set.

The other half is that the packages themselves install programs in
their traditional FHS locations, not their UsrMerge locations.

unicorn:~$ dpkg -L coreutils | grep mkdir
/bin/mkdir
/usr/share/man/man1/mkdir.1.gz

On a non-merged system, the package system's location (/bin/mkdir) and
the PATH-searched location (/bin/mkdir) will match.  But on a merged
system, both /usr/bin/mkdir and /bin/mkdir are valid paths to the command.
If /usr/bin is first in PATH, then the PATH search will give /usr/bin/mkdir,
which won't match where the package system thinks the program is.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232690 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

On 03/10/2021 07:07 AM, songbird wrote:
> Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z wrote:
> ...
>> While I was making my research before installing Debian
>> I saw that the filesystem hierarchy is not so friendly
>> (I'm new to GNU/Linux operating systems).
>> I saw there was a distribution called GoboLinux which
>> addressed that inconvenience, but according to a DistroWatch review,
>> it is not usable at all.
>>
>> In my opinion, I think there would be no need to make another distro
>> to make such customizations to the system, it would be better
>> if it were implemented at a package level on an existing distro.
>>
>> So, my question is: Is there a way to put another, more friendly,
>> filesystem hierarchy to Debian, like the one of GoboLinux?
>>
>> Thanks in advance for your answers.
> 
>    i wouldn't bother.  really it is just a huge waste of time
> for no real gain.
> 
>    the problem is that you are new to linux/unix type system
> and so you don't understand the history or layout as it is.
> 
>    learn what is there as it is.  you rarely need to work
> outside /home/<username> for most things as a normal
> user.  when i install a new system i like to have /home
> in a different partition from the rest of the system.
> 
>    as root you may need to understand more but it isn't
> that often you should be having to do a whole lot of
> changes once you have a stable install set up.
> 
> 

Think of it as a vocabulary shift when moving from one section of the 
country to another.  I felt I had to learn a new language when moving 
from very urban New York to rural Missouri. You get used to it ;}

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232712 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

> Think of it as a vocabulary shift when moving from one section of the
country to another.  I felt I had to learn a new language when moving from
very urban New York to rural Missouri. You get used to it ;}

Yes, it is my only option for now.

Well, thank you all for your help.  Have a good day everyone.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232715 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

Le 10/03/2021 à 04:08, Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z a écrit :
>
> Hello.
>
> While I was making my research before installing Debian
> I saw that the filesystem hierarchy is not so friendly
> (I'm new to GNU/Linux operating systems).
> I saw there was a distribution called GoboLinux which
> addressed that inconvenience, but according to a DistroWatch review,
> it is not usable at all.
>
> In my opinion, I think there would be no need to make another distro
> to make such customizations to the system, it would be better
> if it were implemented at a package level on an existing distro.
>
> So, my question is: Is there a way to put another, more friendly,
> filesystem hierarchy to Debian, like the one of GoboLinux?
>
> Thanks in advance for your answers.
>
Your question is equivalent to saying "is there a way to put commands in
mly car a more friendly way".

It is important that people find thiungs where they are used to find
them. Every placement will need some learning for the beginners, and
changing things won't help beginners and will confuse experienced users.

At the beginiing of minitel in France (a terminal allowing to access
directories and other networking services) builders chose to have an
alphabetic keyboard "more friendly". Second version had the traditional
french AZERTY Keyboard, for this exact reason : it did not help
beginners and confused people who knew to use a keyboard.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232746

> While I was making my research before installing Debian
> I saw that the filesystem hierarchy is not so friendly
> (I'm new to GNU/Linux operating systems).

"Not friendly" indicates that you see a problem with it, but doesn't
really say what problem it was and even less how to fix it.

I personally don't know what a "friendly" filesystem hierarchy might
look like.  I'm sure we can do better than what Debian has (and what
Windows has as well), but until someone has a very clear idea of that
should look like, it's unlikely we'll see much change.


        Stefan


PS: And of course, if you want something better you may want to
challenge some of the assumptions as well, such as the fact that it
needs to be a hierarchy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232756 — Re: Is there an alternative filesystem hierarchy that could be adapted to Debian.

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

> PS: And of course, if you want something better you may want to
> challenge some of the assumptions as well, such as the fact that it
> needs to be a hierarchy.

Thanks, I did not realized that possibility.  There are tags too made to
identify files
or directories in a non-hierarchical manner.
For the filesystem, though, I think that a hierarchy is very organized, and
if well designed,
you should be able to find there whatever you want without knowing where it
is,
just starting at the root directory.

I think too that it could be better than both Debian and Windows are today.
In Windows, if you look under C:\Windows\System32\ it becomes scary.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232789

Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z wrote:

> I think too that it could be better than both Debian and Windows are
> today. In Windows, if you look under C:\Windows\System32\ it becomes
> scary.

Same when you open the hood of your car, no?
Not to mention aircraft engine ... so to put it short - in life a lot of
things are based on conventions (for example language, driving rules,
keyboard etc.). You learn those conventions and go along. The conventions
help us understand each other.
Example: Europe/USA driving on the right side. England/Japan driving on the
left side.
"Scary" means you have no idea - learn, and it will become clear what is
what and why is there.
Once a convention was established, it is very hard to change it, because it
needs re-consolidation of the knowledge of all the people following the
convention. There must be a good reason for this effort and I do not see
any.

This topic is obsolete.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web