Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-11-06 Thread Matt Zimmerman
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 05:59:18PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: Note that new sarge installs should be basically /media compliant, although I don't know if we have every subdir the FHS may require in there. And we still have a /cdrom link to /media since some programs (like apt) have not

Re: $HOME/.dotfiles and FHS 2.3 (was: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1)

2004-11-06 Thread Matt Zimmerman
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 04:53:29PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * bash reads and writes a number of files in ~/ (.bash_profile, .bashrc, .bash_history) * there are several directories related to GNOME (at least ~/.gnome2 and

Re: $HOME/.dotfiles and FHS 2.3 (was: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1)

2004-11-06 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Nov 07, Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It would have been a good idea when these programs were being written. It doesn't seem at all worthwhile to endure a transition of existing software for the marginal aesthetic benefits. Agreed. I see no point in even discussing this,

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-11-03 Thread Rolf Kutz
* Quoting Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Manoj Srivastava wrote: an application needs to create more than one dot file then they should be placed in a subdirectory with a name starting with a '.' character, (a dot directory). In this case the configuration files should not start with the

Re: $HOME/.dotfiles and FHS 2.3 (was: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1)

2004-10-30 Thread Marcelo E. Magallon
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 04:53:29PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: * bash reads and writes a number of files in ~/ (.bash_profile, .bashrc, .bash_history) * there are several directories related to GNOME (at least ~/.gnome2 and ~/.gnome2_private) * vim has

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-29 Thread Nikolai Prokoschenko
On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 09:46:47PM +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote: Speaking of which: there used to be some proposed addition to FHS about re-locating all dot-files into ~/etc or some directory like that. Does anybody know what happened to that? I'm aware of the problems (sharing $HOME

$HOME/.dotfiles and FHS 2.3 (was: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1)

2004-10-29 Thread Frank Küster
Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: 5)== User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the user's home directory in a file that starts with the '.' character (a dot file). [...]

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-29 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:16:59 +0200, Nikolai Prokoschenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 09:46:47PM +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote: Speaking of which: there used to be some proposed addition to FHS about re-locating all dot-files into ~/etc or some directory like

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-28 Thread Ron Johnson
On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 19:53 -0400, Joey Hess wrote: paddy wrote: On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 11:28:14AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: 5)== User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-28 Thread Nikolai Prokoschenko
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the user's home directory in a file that starts with the '.' character (a dot file). If Speaking of which: there used to be some proposed addition to FHS about

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-28 Thread Stig Brautaset
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: User specific configuration files [...] If an application needs to create more than one dot file then they should be placed in a subdirectory with a name starting with a '.' ... I have no idea if we comply, but this is a new requirement. Slrn,

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-28 Thread Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
On Thursday 28 October 2004 01.53, Joey Hess wrote: paddy wrote: what about ~/Desktop and friends? I don't know if Desktop falls under the heading of being a configuration file or directorty. Not that I much like that directory, but like Maildir, it seems out of the scope of this FHS

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-28 Thread Travis Crump
Ron Johnson wrote: On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 19:53 -0400, Joey Hess wrote: paddy wrote: On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 11:28:14AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: 5)== User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the user's

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-28 Thread Nikita V. Youshchenko
Speaking of which: there used to be some proposed addition to FHS about re-locating all dot-files into ~/etc or some directory like that. Does anybody know what happened to that? I'm aware of the problems (sharing $HOME over several different machines etc.), but but I'll be glad if the mess

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-28 Thread Marcelo E. Magallon
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: 5)== User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the user's home directory in a file that starts with the '.' character (a dot file). If an application needs to create more than one dot file then

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-27 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: 5)== User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the user's home directory in a file that starts with the '.' character (a dot file). If an application needs to create more than one dot file then they

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-27 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: 5)== User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the user's home directory in a file that starts with the '.' character (a dot file). If an application

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-27 Thread Joey Hess
Manoj Srivastava wrote: User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the user's home directory in a file that starts with the '.' character (a dot file). If an application needs to create more than one dot file then they should be placed in a subdirectory with a name

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-27 Thread Bill Allombert
On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 10:07:57AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: 5)== User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the user's home

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-27 Thread paddy
On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 11:28:14AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: 5)== User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the user's home directory in a file that starts with the '.' character (a dot file).

Re: Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-27 Thread Joey Hess
paddy wrote: On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 11:28:14AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: 5)== User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the user's home directory in a file that starts with the '.'

Comparing FHS 2.3 and 2.1

2004-10-26 Thread Manoj Srivastava
Hi, I have been trying to determin the changes in FHS 2.3 (as opposed to FHS 2.1 that we already follow) to see what changes have occurred. 1) === FHS 2.3 adds: == 3.3: Specific Options The following directories,