Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 07:34:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Mike A. Harris" <mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca>
Reply-To: "Mike A. Harris" <mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca>
To: OpenDOS Mailing List <opendos AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: FSSTD (was Re: DOS utilities)
In-Reply-To: <199705261834.UAA29261@magigimmix.xs4all.nl>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970527072506.13320C-100000@capslock.com>
Organization: Total disorganization.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 26 May 1997, yeep wrote:

> > The idea is only partly not to screw up any programs, it is also about
> > being able to log on an OpenDOS box and knowing instantly where
> everything
> > is, since it would be *standard*. In Linux with the FSSTND, local
> > configuration files are in /etc, network wide configuration files are in
> > /usr/etc, spool files (for mail, printers, UUCP or Fidonet) are in
> > /var/spool, and so on.
> 
> Well then you'd just check the env-table or check to special FSSTND file.

Then it wouldn't be a "Filesystem Standard".  And people
and programs wouldn't automatically know where everything is
because they would have to go through indirection to find
everything.  Since there are probably 50 to 100 directories 
in the Linux FSSTND, they'd have to consult the "special file"
for virtually everything.

This would make the entire thing pointless, and totally slow down
productivity and file operations on files in standard places.

It's an all or nothing deal IMHO.  You either use the fixed
FSSTND (which is very flexible anyways) or you don't.  In Linux,
if you don't, (and there is absolutely no reason to not
follow the standard) then you will be greeted with all kinds of
incompatibility problems.  If you *DO* want to use different
places, you can use the standard, and then make the appropriate
SYMLINKS where necessary to make older software work, or for
whatever other purposes you may have.

In the OD "FSSTND" you would either use it, or not.  If not, then
you would go on using DOS as you always have, and other people
using your system would be lost until they figured out where
everything was.  Programs would still work though because there
are no hard-coded directories and such.

Therefore, the benefits of a ODFSSTND are logical not physical.
Any "environment variable" or "special file" implementation
wastes valuable environment space (and TPA) and degrades access
to "standard" things.

People missunderstand the meaning of a "Filesystem Standard".
Perhaps they can make something else of it then...


Mike A. Harris        |             http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris
Computer Consultant   |                  Coming soon: dynamic-IP-freedom...
My dynamic address: http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris/ip-address.html
Email: mharris at blackwidow.saultc.on.ca  <-- Spam proof address

LINUX: The ONLY bulletproof 32-bit operating system that has it all.