> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf > Of Rolf Campbell
--8<-- > > I _hate_ having C:\foo\ c:\bar\ c:\this\ c:\that\ directories. They DO > > belong in C:\Program\ (or whatever) _AND NOT IN THE ROOT_ >:-I > > > > Any files belonging to a software package should be kept in a > storage that > > identifies them as beeing part of that package. IMO a well structured > > operating system allows this (e.g. AmigaOS, Unix/Linux) --8<-- > While I agree that not all programs should have a root dir, what's in > yours? "Program", "Documents and Settings", "WINNT"? All that means is > that instead of having 35 root dirs, you have 3 root dirs and 33 dirs in > "Program". That is no better (unless you are running FAT16). Well, that might not be the best way to have it - but I like it a lot more than having the root dirs. > And Linux doesn't give you anything better, they just call "Program > Files" "/bin". I've gotten the impression that this can be selected, at least with rpm/dpkg. Is that wrong? > I like to have (and used to have) a more functionally structured disk: > in "C:\", I had: "Programming", "Courses", "Internet", > "AudioVideo", etc... Ok. I'm an Amiga "old timer" and know very much about the OS. On the Amiga one can put executables, shared (runtime) libraries, fonts and such anywhere - then give the OS pointers (e.g. "assign add fonts: <dir>"). Having done so, all OS calls work as they should. /Hannu E K Nevalainen, Mariefred, Sweden --END OF MESSAGE-- -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/