Mail Archives: opendos/1997/03/14/13:12:51
I changed the subject line.
On Fri, 14 Mar 1997, Matthias Paul wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Well, here is one more directory standard for discussion. After
> developing this firm standard several years ago, we could greatly
> reduce introductions to new users in our institution. Also, it
> is much easier to update local files and applications on the
> workstations. We do this semi-automatically by a set of
> sophisticated, self-modifying, and self-replicating batchjobs
> with two interface-jobs linked into AUTOEXEC.BAT. After one single
> modification on the server, they do most of these boring works
> for us... :-)
>
> Of course, the structure is not absolutely homegene and is slightly
> changing from time to time, but we've made good experiences with it.
> We tried to name the first hierachy level of directories with 3
> letters, since this is easy to remember. Now, we've almost no 'chaos'
> files and directories on the workstations. Even if users install new
> files/applications, they try to do it in respect of this system.
> But mind: Always, a standard should only guide, not restrict.
>
> This one is a short summary for discussion, and would need to be
> adapted for an 'OpenDOS standard'. Just FYI:
>
[Proposed directory structure snipped]
You have your own system, as do I and everyone else. We'd all like to
keep using our structure. I think the only solution that will please most
people is one that lets us decide the names and locations of our
directories. This could be the paths.dir file (see my other posts in the
FSSTND thread) or some other system.
- Raw text -